Development of Project 11442M Admiral Nakhimov - Kirov

Latest Google maps capture on Severodvinsk show Admiral Nakhimov and Admiral Gorshkov at one frame. Using photoshop i want to know how many Redut cells can be placed on top Kinzhal launcher. Sadly, the location of Kinzhal launcher on Nakhimov is obscured by some facilities needed to modernize it, so i placed Pyotr Velikiy on top of it.
So from my effort, 64 Redut cells can be placed on top 16 Kinzhal launcher. Giving the ability to put 128 9M100 and 32 9M96.
 

Attachments

  • Adobe_20220212_001855~2.png
    Adobe_20220212_001855~2.png
    3.3 MB · Views: 237
So, with the current schedule for recommissioning of Nakhimov scheduled for 2024, all they are doing is swapping them out.

Lazarev began scrapping in April 2021, and Ushakov was supposedly scrapped starting in 2021 - has there been confirmation of this?
 
Not on the PV.
It's The Sun.
They took a report from Tass, using an "unnamed source" stating "unconfirmed reports" and created an entire article inferring the PV is being scrapped, with dollops of emotive politically charged language mixed in.

For all we know, the PV will undergo the same modernisation that the Nakhimov has. That was the original intention.

I last read that the Ushakovs scrapping was put on hold pending a study into it.
But this was a couple of years ago.
 
Is there an info page about the current modernization?
What changes were included?
 
Not sure about the current modernisation.
But the initial modernisation was refit, repair, overhaul..including the reactors.
The electronics and weapon systems were to be modernised..both the SAM and SSM systems.
New vertical launch modules included.
I seem to recall the gun systems and other systems were also looked at to be modernised.

Due to the current geopolitical situation, it is difficult to now get solid information, like many other projects.
They seem to have stopped giving out a lot of information like they used to.

I've stopped following much of it, as the void and paucity of information nowdays has been filled with highly speculative and politicised articles here in the West, that once you dig into them, reveal their speculative nature.
 
Last edited:
kaiserbill said:
Not on the PV.
It's The Sun.
They took a report from Tass, using an "unnamed source" stating "unconfirmed reports" and created an entire article inferring the PV is being scrapped, with dollops of emotive politically charged language mixed in.

For all we know, the PV will undergo the same modernisation that the Nakhimov has. That was the original intention.

I last read that the Ushakovs scrapping was put on hold pending a study into it.
But this was a couple of years ago.
Click to expand...
Sorry... I did NOT get my info from The Sun.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1388263819701456899
View: https://twitter.com/seawaves_mag/status/1388263819701456899


The TASS article is quoting Izvestia:
https://www.navyrecognition.com/ind...-and-two-cruisers-to-be-scrapped-by-2021.html
 
Honestly this is probably extremely over do.

The Kirovs for all their Beauty and Firepower.

Are just a maintenance nightmare once you stop to think of it if you know some of their design history.

Like leaving out the utter Nightmare that is their powerplants.

All of their weapons are prime examples of the soviets not allowing their differences designers to cross talk. So each and every weapon system has a different need compare to each other. Leading to a wiring mess that is at best describe as a clusterfuck.

And thanks to no unified weapon system they got an rader frequency Signature that is a mess that requires constant attention to keep from self jamming.

And that wasn't something that got fixed with the modernization refits. Just by looking at Pyotr Velikiy we can see multiple different directors, with two different versions for the SA-N-6.

Toss in their age and the whole nearly a decade of no maintenance?

Honestly the money for their refits could have been better used for more Admiral Gorshkov-class frigates or better maintaince of their subs.
 
Firefinder said:
And that wasn't something that got fixed with the modernization refits. Just by looking at Pyotr Velikiy we can see multiple different directors, with two different versions for the SA-N-6.
Click to expand...
She got two S-300F models - the standard S-300F on stern, and more modern S-300FM on bow. That's why the bow fire control radar is different.
 
kaiserbill said:
Not on the PV.
It's The Sun.
They took a report from Tass, using an "unnamed source" stating "unconfirmed reports" and created an entire article inferring the PV is being scrapped, with dollops of emotive politically charged language mixed in.

For all we know, the PV will undergo the same modernisation that the Nakhimov has. That was the original intention.

I last read that the Ushakovs scrapping was put on hold pending a study into it.
But this was a couple of years ago.
Click to expand...
Yeah. I have doubtas about it as well. It's one ting if Russia had good and Robust shipbuilding industry and there were other 1st rank ships with big displacement to, but they couln't make 4 4500 ton frigates in reasonable timeframe, and have zero experience whatsoever in making destroyer-sized ships.
Their current bluewater navy for long deployments are Soviet-era two 1164 cruisers, single 1144 cruiser PV and 9 1155 ASW destroyers. And 2+1 22350 frigates + 3 11536 frigates.
BlackBat242 said:
kaiserbill said:
Not on the PV.
It's The Sun.
They took a report from Tass, using an "unnamed source" stating "unconfirmed reports" and created an entire article inferring the PV is being scrapped, with dollops of emotive politically charged language mixed in.

For all we know, the PV will undergo the same modernisation that the Nakhimov has. That was the original intention.

I last read that the Ushakovs scrapping was put on hold pending a study into it.
But this was a couple of years ago.
Click to expand...
Sorry... I did NOT get my info from The Sun.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1388263819701456899
View: https://twitter.com/seawaves_mag/status/1388263819701456899


The TASS article is quoting Izvestia:
https://www.navyrecognition.com/ind...-and-two-cruisers-to-be-scrapped-by-2021.html
Click to expand...
Lazarev is second ship of series. She was also quite a long time awaiting her fate, but Russia looking at Nakhimov upgrade costs decided to scrap her. Same for Kirov, first ship of class, the question of reactivating her wasn't even raised.
So there is two ships left: Nakhimov, 3rd ship of class, and PV - last ship. Nakhimov will be upgraded, and plan was to put PV in drydock after.
 
Blackbat, I didn't quote you, and wasn't referring to you.
I was referring to The Sun article posted by another poster.

The Lazarev had issues with its reactor.
It was slated to be scrapped, then that was put on hold, then the reprieve was rescinded once again..etc.

I personally think that the PV will follow the Nakhimov into the shipyard for modernisation once that is inducted back into the fleet. This has been stated to be the intention on more than one occasion.

The Kirovs actually have a hull of very high quality steel. I recall reading about the design and grade of it a few years back.

The Nakhimov upgrade seeks to comprehensively upgrade the electronics and missile systems to be more in line with weaponry that is currently being produced in Russia since the dissolution of the USSR.
The intention was and likely still is to do the same to the PV.
The only barrier might be cost, as the Nakhimov upgrade is quite expensive (and thus by inference, extensive).

EDIT: It was Ushakov that had a problem with its reactor, not Lazarev.
 
Last edited:
Anduriel said:
Yeah. I have doubtas about it as well. It's one ting if Russia had good and Robust shipbuilding industry and there were other 1st rank ships with big displacement to, but they couln't make 4 4500 ton frigates in reasonable timeframe, and have zero experience whatsoever in making destroyer-sized ships.
Their current bluewater navy for long deployments are Soviet-era two 1164 cruisers, single 1144 cruiser PV and 9 1155 ASW destroyers. And 2+1 22350 frigates + 3 11536 frigates.
Click to expand...
I think we need to bear in mind how disruptive the break up of the USSR was.
Suppliers of systems, components, and subcomponents were located across the USSR.

The best analogy I have seen is that it would have been akin the the breakup of the USA into various states or countries, and expecting smooth supplier continuation and existence on various platforms there.

Then throw in the global economic meltdown in 2008, and then the current Ukrainian situation..which resulted in a key supplier of gas turbines (a legacy of the USSR supply chain) being completely disrupted..and it is understandable.
There has however been considerable investment in shipyards (and gas turbine production) in the last few years to rectify these issues, and consolidate design and production within Russia.
I suspect that will start bearing fruit.
 
Last edited:
kaiserbill said:
The only barrier might be cost, as the Nakhimov upgrade is quite expensive (and thus by inference, extensive).
Click to expand...
Petro upgrade might be cheaper than Nakhimov one. One of the reasons of high cost inflation was that Russia didn't produce necessary parts anymore, so they had to restart making them again, with all that entails - new tooling, personnel, etc. But since it was alreay done for Nakhimov, one could save these cost when upgradidng PV.
 
Anduriel said:
kaiserbill said:
The only barrier might be cost, as the Nakhimov upgrade is quite expensive (and thus by inference, extensive).
Click to expand...
Petro upgrade might be cheaper than Nakhimov one. One of the reasons of high cost inflation was that Russia didn't produce necessary parts anymore, so they had to restart making them again, with all that entails - new tooling, personnel, etc. But since it was alreay done for Nakhimov, one could save these cost when upgradidng PV.
Click to expand...
I also think so.
Transferring that to PV after cutting their teeth on Nakhimov with all the headaches that surely entailed... you would have to assume it would go easier on the PV.
 
So, new photos of Nakhimov emerged, as the ship goes for sea trials.

side_view-numbers.png

Trying to figure out what all the radars are.

1: MR-650 Podberezovik
2: 30N6 "Flap Lid B" fore and aft
3: I can't tell what this is, maybe a Furke under a radome?
4: This looks like a new surface search radar, as it replaces "Strut Pair". Rectangular rotating array in portrait orientation.
5: MR-750 Fregat-MA or some variant
6: Maybe 5P10 Puma for the gun?
7: Another candidate for a Furke radar?

Confirmed weapons:
6 x Pantsir-M emplacements (3 per side)
10 x 8-cell UKSK for P-800
12 x 8-cell rotary launchers for S-300FM?
1 x AK-192M 130 mm gun

I really most sincerely need some top down photos... :D
 

Attachments

  • side_view_1.png
    side_view_1.png
    701.2 KB · Views: 100
  • side_view2.jpg
    side_view2.jpg
    121 KB · Views: 97
Last edited:
lancer21 said:
A satellite image from July.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's the latest Google Earth snapshot. Does not look like there are any Redut cells, which means it's only the rotary launchers + UKSK + Pantsir-M, and the A-192M.

Interestingly, the structures that used to house the Osa-M (SA-N-4) launchers are still present in the satellite image - I didn't notice that until now, but they're there in the other photos too and are apparently used for some sort of chaff/flare system, I think? I need to put them back on my model... :D

Looks like they saved a whole bunch more of superstructure than I thought.
 
Winchester said:
1: MR-650 Podberezovik
2: 30N6 "Flap Lid B" fore and aft
3: I can't tell what this is, maybe a Furke under a radome?
4: This looks like a new surface search radar, as it replaces "Strut Pair". Rectangular rotating array in portrait orientation.
5: MR-750 Fregat-MA or some variant
6: Maybe 5P10 Puma for the gun?
7: Another candidate for a Furke radar?
Click to expand...
I think I solved #4: It looks a *whole* lot like the 5P-30N2 "Fregat-N2" radar installed on the modernized Udaloy-class destroyers "Marshal Shaposhikov" and "Vice-Admiral Kulakov".
 

Attachments

  • 16-3745865-v-a-kulakov-2013-vovanych-1977-23.09.2013-1248[1].jpg
    16-3745865-v-a-kulakov-2013-vovanych-1977-23.09.2013-1248[1].jpg
    725 KB · Views: 111
Winchester said:
2: 30N6 "Flap Lid B" fore and aft
Click to expand...
Iirc there was mentioning of procurement orders many years ago, this is some sort of s-400, i.e. 92n6 (plus 40N6 integration).
Actual index in maritime version unknown, though system will almost inevitably remain unique.
 
Ainen said:
Iirc there was mentioning of procurement orders many years ago, this is some sort of s-400, i.e. 92n6 (plus 40N6 integration).
Actual index in maritime version unknown, though system will almost inevitably remain unique.
Click to expand...

The problem with 40N6 is that it looks like the launch canister for that is bigger than what actually fits in the rotary launchers on the Kirov-class... and unlike the Granit launchers, they didn't rip the S-300 launchers out to replace them at any point during the refit. So Nakhimov is likely stuck with 48N6, though its going to be a more modern version than what she carried before.

The Russian sources I've looked at say that while the first two ships were completed with 5V55R missiles, Kalinin had modified launchers that allowed the ship to carry 48N6 - a missile which outranged the capacity of the 3R41 Volna. Which is why they added the 30N6 radar on Pyotr Velikiy, so they could use the missiles to their full range. 5V55R and 48N6 are close to identical in size, but 40N6 is bigger than the other two, and there's no room to expand the diameter of the launch tubes in the naval launcher because it has to fit in the same space it already does, and the missile will have to fly out of a hole that can't be made any bigger.
 
Winchester said:
So, new photos of Nakhimov emerged, as the ship goes for sea trials.

View attachment 782093

Trying to figure out what all the radars are.

1: MR-650 Podberezovik
2: 30N6 "Flap Lid B" fore and aft
3: I can't tell what this is, maybe a Furke under a radome?
4: This looks like a new surface search radar, as it replaces "Strut Pair". Rectangular rotating array in portrait orientation.
5: MR-750 Fregat-MA or some variant
6: Maybe 5P10 Puma for the gun?
7: Another candidate for a Furke radar?

Confirmed weapons:
6 x Pantsir-M emplacements (3 per side)
20 x 8-cell UKSK for P-800
12 x 8-cell rotary launchers for S-300FM?
1 x AK-192M 130 mm gun

I really most sincerely need some top down photos... :D
Click to expand...
Where are the 20 launchers for P-800? i can see 10 of them
 
mirco1961 said:
Where are the 20 launchers for P-800? i can see 10 of them
Click to expand...
...That's me being stupid and not thinking, no excuse. Fixed it.

It'a 10 x 8. (I also discovered I wrote 8 x 8 for the S-300FM at one point, but I caught that quickly).
 
Wes O'Donnell has just put out a video concerning the rebuilt and recommissioned Admiral Nakhimov:


After nearly three decades stuck in drydock, Russia has rolled out its latest “superweapon,” a relic from the Cold War, dressed up in fresh paint and propaganda. Meet the Admiral Nakhimov, a 28,000-ton Kirov-class nuclear battlecruiser, now back on the water for sea trials.
Click to expand...
On paper, it looks terrifying:
• 174 vertical launch tubes stuffed with Kalibrs, Oniks, and even Zircons.
• 96 navalized S-400 launchers promising to knock down everything from fighter jets to hypersonics.
• Twin nuclear reactors that, in theory, give it unlimited endurance at sea.

But here’s the reality: this is less a “game changer” and more a Cold War zombie, staggering back into service with the same weaknesses that sank the Moskva and crippled the Kuznetsov.
Click to expand...
In this video, I dig into:
• Why resurrecting nuclear-powered cruisers is a logistical nightmare even the U.S. Navy abandoned.
• The manpower problem: untrained conscripts tasked with running a floating Chernobyl.
• The fire hazard: Russia’s track record of infernos, drydock collapses, and crane accidents turning sea trials into comedy sketches.
• The morale crisis: a demoralized fleet humiliated by cheap Ukrainian drones and missiles, now expected to crew a nuclear giant.
• The new reality of naval warfare: billion-dollar warships sinking to $250,000 drones, saturation strikes, and asymmetric weapons.

The Nakhimov isn’t about strategy, it’s about symbolism. Moscow wants the world to believe it’s still a superpower, but the truth is brutal: this ship is an oversized target in an age where even hobbyist-looking USVs can humiliate the Russian Navy.
Click to expand...
A fortress at sea is still just a fortress. And fortresses fall.
Click to expand...
tldr: After sitting for decades, Russia is bringing the Admiral Nakhimov, a Kirov class battlecruiser, back into service. This nuclear powered warship is a relic of the Cold War, but Moscow hopes it will provide modern naval warfare capabilities. See how this giant russian warship could impact the naval fleet.
Click to expand...
 
Those old nuclear reactors from the soviet times look like a disaster waiting to happen. I would not like to have such a ship docked nearby my town.
 
NMaude said:
I do recommend watching it.
Click to expand...
Ok.
I tried.
I stopped watching after about 40 seconds.
Let me give you 2 direct quotes after less than a minute:
1. " It waddled back in the water after only a slap of fresh paint"
2. " In reality, it is held together by vodka and duct tape"

Political slop and clickbait pretending to be "analysis "
I come from an era when Comprehension was still taught at school, which is why I avoid such videos like the plague.

Exactly as I feared, and the other posters are right.
A minute of my life I will never get back.
 
Last edited:
kaiserbill said:
Political slop and clickbait pretending to be "analysis "
Click to expand...
You should have known this based on the thumbnail. (Hint: lower left corner).

Trying to get decent, impartial analysis in the English language space has become more difficult than the modernization of Admiral Nakhimov itself.

I think we'll have to wait for a while until someone serious puts out a semi-decent video about the reworked Admiral Nakhimov and it's systems.

On the ship itself, putting it back into service made sense, especially now that Admiral Kuznetsov is dead and buried. It's a cold war symbol that's suitable as a flag ship for the Russian Navy, reminiscent of the peak of soviet naval engineering. And thanks to the sheer armament it's stuffed with and in theory unlimited range (if it wasn't for that pesky crew) it still brings some value to the fleet in operation as compared to the derelict flat deck. Are the Gorshkovs a better value? Surely. But if it's just about that Russia would only be constructing Yasen-Ms and ASW assets. The Nakhimov has arguably more value as a symbol than as a combat asset. Just with the added bonus that in combat it can at least launch a metric fuck ton of missiles at something before going down. While operation may be expensive, compared to conventional ships, Russia operates plenty of nuclear surface ships, namely their vast fleet of nuclear icebreakers on top of their nuclear submarines. So I don't think there is a shortage of trained nuclear technicians and infrastructure to maintain and train the ship and it's personelle. Something that is arguably more difficult in the US because nuclear naval propulsion is something purely militaristic in the States, so you don't have a pool of civilians familiar with the matter and infrastructure to draw from. So I'd argue it's less of a logistical burden than many would think, actually.

Most importantly though, obviously, it just looks incredibly cool.

Also just saying "heavy nuclear powered guided missile cruiser" out loud feels positively dirty.
 
Will the Pyotr Velikiy too receive this modernization?
Or did the other sisters intended to receive before they are ordered to be scrapped?
 
Tzoli said:
Will the Pyotr Velikiy too receive this modernization?
Or did the other sisters intended to receive before they are ordered to be scrapped?
Click to expand...
Isn't Pyotr Velikiy going to be decommissioned now that Admiral Nakhimov is returning to service?
 
But isn't Pyotr Velikiy received a refurbishment / refit in the mid-late 2000's so it can serve longer while the other two ships was basically unchamgee since they entered service?
 
Harry64 said:
Maybe... but think of the fate of the Moskva... she also disappeared quickly!
Click to expand...
"Moskva" was essentially 1980s warship. She never undergone any large-scale refit, even repairs were limited. In late 2010s she was nearly decommissioned, due to being in poor technical state and with little interest from Black Sea Fleet to maintain such unit. To put it simply, she was old ship, not refitted and in poor conditions.
 
I can imagine Pyotr Velikiy perhaps getting a similar refit.
Or perhaps a limited Service Life Extension refit.
Anybody know the status of Ushakov?
I have seen various reports saying she is to be scrapped, but also the odd report a while back about consideration of a refit.
I personally assume that 2 of these vessels would be enough.
 
Dilandu said:
"Moskva" was essentially 1980s warship. She never undergone any large-scale refit, even repairs were limited. In late 2010s she was nearly decommissioned, due to being in poor technical state and with little interest from Black Sea Fleet to maintain such unit. To put it simply, she was old ship, not refitted and in poor conditions.
Click to expand...
It makes one wonder if refitting that comparatively cheaper air defense/surface strike asset and an Udaloy for asw might have been the better choice for hanging onto the blue water surface fleet, I don't think the existing Udaloy fleet has the quant/qual to effectively fight off the latest submarines without a Yasen escort which limits their ability to deploy overseas, they dumped money into modernizing a nuclear heavy cruiser instead of destroyers and cruisers, and now their frigates are shouldering a burden they shouldn't have to alone. Buying the 4th Slava and upgrading it and the Moskva would have given both blue water fleets 2 modern air defense cruisers without spending excessive amounts on another costly to refit/modernize/crew/power/arm Kirov, freeing needed funds for naval aviation and Udaloy modernization... they still have a Kirov in service anyway. I can't help but feel that the choice to modernize the Nakhimov while a lot of the navy's core capabilities were and are severely eroding will be seen by naval historians as a serious error.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom