Matrix Games Forums

Assume this backdrop:

The Soviet Union boomed economically during the 1980s as a result of a prolonged energy crisis and did not fall. Substantial investments were made in a blue water fleet.

What refits do they do with to aging Soviet ships?

What else do they build?

Which historically delayed weapons systems get deployed earlier?

Perhaps the more important question is in this case is what time frame do you plan to set your scenario(s)?
If it's the late 1980s, you're probably better off just adding more Soviet units than in the original time line.

But if you're looking into the 90s and early 2000s, then a fair few CMO hypothetical units, or those which the USSR/RF started to build but then was forced to cancel, abandon etc can come into play. The ones that come to mind are:
Ulyanovsk CVN - cancelled in the original time line (OTL).
Udaloy II DDGs - only one was built in the OTL.
Kirov BCGNs - four were built in the OTL but one was mothballed in the late 90s. The fifth was scrapped in 1990, so with a better economy, at least one more of these gets built. You could probably increase that number further it if you wanted.
Oscar SSGNs - several of these were under construction at in the early 90s and were mothballed in the OTL. Therefore, they could be in service in your scens.
Akula SSNs - as with the Oscars, many of these had their construction abandoned in the early 90s.

Wikipedia is pretty useful for getting names and dates for the above units.

In terms of aircraft, the USSR deploying the following aircraft in the 90s and 2000s could be plausible:
Yak-41/141 to replace the Yak-38 on the Russian Kiev class CVs.
Yak-44 for CVN AEW duties.
MiG-1.44 to counter the US F-22/F-23 programme
Maybe a few Flanker variants from the 2000s that are armed with AA-12 Adders make it into service earlier to balance against US AMRAAMs?

There's probably a few other Russian hypothetical units from the DB I'm missing too.

Thanks- I am thinking 1998.

You should also check out the Northern Fury set of scenarios along with its spinoffs (Caribbean Fury, etc.), since the premise is similar to yours with hostilities starting in 1994.

I think there are a number of "generic" units, carriers specifically in the DB3K that you can modify with sensors, weapons, magazines and so on. Then, save the ships to an .inst file for loading later. Sort of an adhoc way to go about creating something that doesn't, or didn't exist. Same goes for the other units that are more or less generic or lacking certain features.

I created a "hypothetical" PLAN drone carrier using one of the generic carrier platforms. It's not perfect. I have some issues with the runway/launching abilities and certain PLAN/PLAAF drones. But there are other drones that will fly off it and land.

So, if motivated you might look into some "home brewed" units that never actually existed.

schweggy wrote: Fri Oct 25, 2024 7:14 pm I think there are a number of "generic" units, carriers specifically in the DB3K that you can modify with sensors, weapons, magazines and so on. Then, save the ships to an .inst file for loading later. Sort of an adhoc way to go about creating something that doesn't, or didn't exist. Same goes for the other units that are more or less generic or lacking certain features.

I created a "hypothetical" PLAN drone carrier using one of the generic carrier platforms. It's not perfect. I have some issues with the runway/launching abilities and certain PLAN/PLAAF drones. But there are other drones that will fly off it and land.

So, if motivated you might look into some "home brewed" units that never actually existed.

Thank you, I did not realize that!

rmeckman wrote: Fri Oct 25, 2024 6:23 pm You should also check out the Northern Fury set of scenarios along with its spinoffs (Caribbean Fury, etc.), since the premise is similar to yours with hostilities starting in 1994.

That was my inspiration!

I asked chatgpt for suggestions on how to upgrade the kirov. What do others think of this?

Hypothetical Upgrades to Kirov-Class Ships by 1998 in a Thriving Soviet Union

In a scenario where the Soviet Union survived and continued to thrive economically, the Kirov-class battlecruisers would likely have received significant upgrades by 1998 to maintain their status as formidable naval assets. Below are specific weapons and electronic warfare (EW) systems that could have been integrated, considering technology available up to 2004.


---

1. Missile Systems Enhancements

Anti-Ship Missiles: Upgrade from the P-700 Granit (SS-N-19 Shipwreck) to the P-800 Oniks (SS-N-26 Strobile) supersonic anti-ship cruise missiles. The Oniks offers improved speed (up to Mach 2.5), range (up to 300 km), and advanced guidance systems resistant to electronic countermeasures.

Land-Attack Capability: Integration of the 3M14 Kalibr (SS-N-27 Sizzler) land-attack cruise missiles, providing the ability to strike ground targets with high precision at ranges up to 2,500 km.

Vertical Launch Systems (VLS): Installation of universal VLS cells to replace older missile launchers, allowing for a more flexible loadout of missiles, including anti-ship, land-attack, and anti-submarine variants.


2. Air Defense Upgrades

Long-Range Surface-to-Air Missiles (SAMs): Upgrade the S-300F (SA-N-6 Grumble) system to the S-300FM (SA-N-20 Gargoyle) variant, featuring improved 48N6 missiles with enhanced range (up to 150 km) and better engagement capabilities against modern aircraft and missiles.

Medium-Range Air Defense: Addition of the 9M317M (SA-N-12 Grizzly) missiles as part of the Shtil-1 system, offering improved defense against anti-ship missiles and aircraft at medium ranges.

Close-In Weapon Systems (CIWS): Replacement of older AK-630 CIWS with the Kashtan-M (CADS-N-1) system, combining 30mm Gatling guns with 9M311 missiles for layered defense against incoming threats.


3. Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW) Improvements

ASW Missile System: Installation of the RPK-9 Medvedka (SS-N-29) ASW missile system, enabling rapid response to submarine threats by delivering lightweight torpedoes over distances up to 20 km.

Advanced Torpedoes: Upgrade to UGST (Physicist) heavyweight torpedoes, featuring improved speed, range, and guidance systems for engaging enemy submarines and surface ships.


4. Electronic Warfare and Sensor Suite

Radar Systems:

Air/Surface Search Radar: Upgrade to the Fregat-MAE-5 3D radar, enhancing detection range and target tracking capabilities for both air and surface contacts.

Fire Control Radar: Implementation of the MR-750 Fregat-M2EM radar for improved missile guidance and engagement accuracy.


Sonar Systems:

Hull-Mounted Sonar: Upgrade to the Zarya-ME sonar system for better submarine detection and tracking.

Towed Array Sonar: Addition of the Vignette-EM towed array for enhanced passive detection of quiet submarines.


Electronic Countermeasures (ECM):

TK-25E-5 ECM Suite: Provides advanced jamming and deception capabilities against enemy radars and guided weapons.

PK-10 and PK-16 Decoy Launchers: Deploy chaff and IR decoys to confuse incoming missiles.



5. Artillery and Gun Systems

Main Gun Upgrade: Replacement of the AK-130 dual 130mm guns with the A-192M Armat 130mm naval gun, offering higher rate of fire and improved accuracy due to advanced fire control systems.

Secondary Artillery: Addition of Duet twin 30mm automated gun mounts for close-in defense against small surface threats and low-flying aircraft.


6. Repurposing Helicopter Facilities

With the removal of helicopters, the hangar and flight deck space can be utilized for:

Expanded VLS Capacity: Installing additional VLS cells to increase the number of missiles carried, enhancing sustained combat operations.

Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs): Deployment of early tactical UAVs like the Tipchak system for reconnaissance, surveillance, and target acquisition, extending situational awareness without manned helicopters.


7. Additional Defensive Systems

Hard-Kill Anti-Torpedo Defense: Implementation of the UDAV-1M anti-torpedo system, capable of launching countermeasures and small rockets to intercept incoming torpedoes.

Integrated Air Defense System: Upgraded combat information center to coordinate all air defense assets more effectively, creating a multi-layered defense network.


8. Propulsion and Power Generation

Reactor Modernization: Enhancements to the KN-3 nuclear reactors for increased efficiency, reliability, and safety, potentially extending the time between refueling and maintenance.

Electrical Power Upgrades: Installation of more powerful generators and distribution systems to support new electronics and weaponry, ensuring optimal performance of all systems.


9. Command and Control Enhancements

Combat Management System: Integration of the Sigma-E combat management system for improved data processing, threat evaluation, and weapon assignment, allowing for faster reaction times in complex combat scenarios.

Communication Systems: Upgraded secure communication links, including satellite communication capabilities, to maintain robust connectivity with naval command and other assets.


10. Crew Accommodations and Automation

Automation Technologies: Introduction of advanced automation in weapon systems and ship operations to reduce crew workload and size, leading to cost savings and increased efficiency.

Improved Living Conditions: Renovation of crew quarters with better amenities to enhance morale and habitability during extended deployments.



---

Summary

These incremental upgrades would transform the Kirov-class ships into even more powerful and versatile platforms, capable of projecting power and defending against a wide range of threats. By incorporating advanced missile systems, superior electronic warfare capabilities, and modernized sensors and weaponry, the Soviet Navy would maintain a significant strategic advantage at sea.

It is worth mentioning that it is possible to add weapons, magazines, etc. to ships in the scenario editor. It is not hard to do this. So you are not limited only to hypothetical platforms that already exist in the database. (Just for fun, I did once add lasers to an orca, although it could only use the laser when it was surfaced. Even so, as I was able to sink hapless civilian vessels while testing the laser, I believe this qualifies me for membership in the Evil League of Evil.)

It is also possible to add new sensors, although this also requires adding new communication links sometimes, which is trickier. I'm not sure exactly how to do that, but I think it involves editing the delta template .ini file.

kahta wrote: Sat Oct 26, 2024 1:39 am I asked chatgpt for suggestions on how to upgrade the kirov. What do others think of this?

kahta wrote: Sat Oct 26, 2024 1:39 am I asked chatgpt for suggestions on how to upgrade the kirov. What do others think of this?

Hypothetical Upgrades to Kirov-Class Ships by 1998 in a Thriving Soviet Union

In a scenario where the Soviet Union survived and continued to thrive economically, the Kirov-class battlecruisers would likely have received significant upgrades by 1998 to maintain their status as formidable naval assets. Below are specific weapons and electronic warfare (EW) systems that could have been integrated, considering technology available up to 2004.

...

These incremental upgrades would transform the Kirov-class ships into even more powerful and versatile platforms, capable of projecting power and defending against a wide range of threats. By incorporating advanced missile systems, superior electronic warfare capabilities, and modernized sensors and weaponry, the Soviet Navy would maintain a significant strategic advantage at sea.

Those 10 points were ChatGPT answer!?


LOL, we are doomed.

Mgellis wrote: Sun Oct 27, 2024 2:05 am It is worth mentioning that it is possible to add weapons, magazines, etc. to ships in the scenario editor. It is not hard to do this. So you are not limited only to hypothetical platforms that already exist in the database. (Just for fun, I did once add lasers to an orca, although it could only use the laser when it was surfaced. Even so, as I was able to sink hapless civilian vessels while testing the laser, I believe this qualifies me for membership in the Evil League of Evil.)

It is also possible to add new sensors, although this also requires adding new communication links sometimes, which is trickier. I'm not sure exactly how to do that, but I think it involves editing the delta template .ini file.

kahta wrote: Sat Oct 26, 2024 1:39 am I asked chatgpt for suggestions on how to upgrade the kirov. What do others think of this?

Yes, that is exactly what I am going in my testing. Attached is one of my scenarios I made to test. Many of the Soviet ships have various changes and upgrades and then I run the scenario to test how they do against different counterattacking NATO equipment.

I would be interested in hearing what people think of this concept (created by chatgpt)

In an alternate history where the Soviet Union continued to thrive economically and technologically into the 1990s, it would be feasible to envision an adaptation of Delta III-class ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs) into anti-air warfare (AAW) platforms by 1998. The following hypothetical details outline the potential capabilities, missile configurations, defenses, and doctrines associated with such a conversion.

Conversion of Delta III SSBNs to Anti-Air Role

1. Structural Changes:

The primary modification would involve replacing the 16 SLBM silos with Vertical Launch System (VLS) cells for Surface-to-Air Missiles (SAMs).

To fit a layered air defense array, modifications to the hull would accommodate retractable turrets for Close-In Weapon Systems (CIWS) and smaller SAMs, maintaining the submarine’s hydrodynamic efficiency.



2. Missile Configuration:

Primary Anti-Air Missiles:

S-300F Rif-M (SA-N-6): A naval adaptation of the S-300, intended for high-altitude and long-range threats. Each SLBM silo could house four VLS cells for the S-300F, so 16 SLBM silos could translate to 64 Rif-M missiles. These would be the submarine’s long-range defense against aircraft and cruise missiles.


Intermediate and Short-Range Missiles:

9M317M (SA-N-12 Grizzly): A smaller SAM optimized for medium-range intercepts. Each SLBM silo could hold six 9M317M cells due to their smaller size, yielding 96 missiles in total.

Tor-M2 (SA-N-9 Gauntlet): Designed for close-range engagements and effective against fast, low-flying threats. Each SLBM silo could hold nine cells, giving a capacity of 144 Gauntlets.


CIWS:

Kashtan CIWS (equivalent to Phalanx): Mounting retractable Kashtan CIWS turrets would offer point defense. Ideally, 2–4 turrets could be installed across the submarine’s hull. Each Kashtan turret includes two 30mm guns and four 9M311 missiles, providing a final defense layer against incoming threats.




3. Layered Air Defense Layout:

Long Range: S-300F Rif-M (SA-N-6) missiles for intercepting high-altitude threats.

Medium Range: 9M317M (SA-N-12 Grizzly) for intercepting intermediate threats.

Short Range: Tor-M2 (SA-N-9 Gauntlet) for close-range intercepts of missiles or aircraft.

Point Defense: Kashtan CIWS turrets for last-resort interception, especially useful against missile saturation attacks.




Tactical and Strategic Doctrine

1. Strategic Role:

These AAW-modified Delta III submarines would act as mobile air defense platforms, supporting offensive naval operations in areas with significant air threat, like the Norwegian Sea, the North Atlantic, or near critical NATO bases.

By enhancing air defense in otherwise vulnerable regions, these subs would create “no-fly zones,” complicating enemy air superiority and deterring maritime patrol aircraft, reducing the detection risk for accompanying Soviet submarines and surface ships.



2. Tactical Doctrine:

Operational Pairing with Akula II-class SSNs: The Delta III would be escorted by Akula II submarines, acting as hunter-killers to protect the AAW submarine from enemy SSNs and ASW assets. This combination would form a specialized battle group:

The Delta III’s role would be to create an aerial shield over the battle group, intercepting hostile aircraft, ASW helicopters, and long-range ASW weapons.

The Akula IIs would maintain a defensive perimeter against underwater threats, extending the survivability of the AAW Delta III.


Offensive Escort Missions: The Delta III could lead formations into contested waters, suppressing enemy air patrols while Akula IIs target surface and submarine threats.




Production Estimates and Conversion Feasibility

1. Production of New Units:

Assuming the Soviet Union’s thriving economic condition, it’s plausible that 2–3 newly-built Delta III variants per year could be commissioned starting around 1992. By 1998, this would result in approximately 12–15 new AAW Delta III submarines.



2. Conversions of Existing Delta III Units:

The USSR had initially built 14 Delta III submarines. Converting older Delta IIIs to AAW could feasibly start in the early 1990s, with each conversion taking 18–24 months. Realistically, 5–7 Delta IIIs could be converted by 1998, retaining the latest, best-conditioned vessels for conversion.




Overall Impact

The development of these anti-air-focused Delta III variants would represent a significant shift in Soviet naval doctrine, as it would allow submarines to play a more versatile role in fleet defense. Paired with Akula II SSNs, they could project force in high-threat areas, challenging NATO’s air and naval dominance and securing the Soviet Union’s ability to conduct strategic naval operations in contested waters.

I'm very curious where Chat GPT got this from as, while SAMs on a submarine isn't a new concept, turning an entire sub into a mobile air defence platform in the 1990s/2000s seems rather farfetched. With modern CEC capabilities, a sub might be able to unleash a SAM without using any active sensors, but it's likely the missile launch will be detected via passive sonar. A large sub sitting on the surface and having to use powerful radars to launch its SAMs will certainly be detected by NATO ASW aircraft, which also had/have ELINT capabilities.

It could be a fun concept to test in CMO, but it sounds a bit ridiculous to think the Soviets would have actually deployed these in numbers.

kahta wrote: Thu Oct 31, 2024 11:46 am I would be interested in hearing what people think of this concept (created by chatgpt)

In an alternate history where the Soviet Union continued to thrive economically and technologically into the 1990s, it would be feasible to envision an adaptation of Delta III-class ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs) into anti-air warfare (AAW) platforms by 1998. The following hypothetical details outline the potential capabilities, missile configurations, defenses, and doctrines associated with such a conversion.

Conversion of Delta III SSBNs to Anti-Air Role

1. Structural Changes:

The primary modification would involve replacing the 16 SLBM silos with Vertical Launch System (VLS) cells for Surface-to-Air Missiles (SAMs).

To fit a layered air defense array, modifications to the hull would accommodate retractable turrets for Close-In Weapon Systems (CIWS) and smaller SAMs, maintaining the submarine’s hydrodynamic efficiency.



2. Missile Configuration:

Primary Anti-Air Missiles:

S-300F Rif-M (SA-N-6): A naval adaptation of the S-300, intended for high-altitude and long-range threats. Each SLBM silo could house four VLS cells for the S-300F, so 16 SLBM silos could translate to 64 Rif-M missiles. These would be the submarine’s long-range defense against aircraft and cruise missiles.


Intermediate and Short-Range Missiles:

9M317M (SA-N-12 Grizzly): A smaller SAM optimized for medium-range intercepts. Each SLBM silo could hold six 9M317M cells due to their smaller size, yielding 96 missiles in total.

Tor-M2 (SA-N-9 Gauntlet): Designed for close-range engagements and effective against fast, low-flying threats. Each SLBM silo could hold nine cells, giving a capacity of 144 Gauntlets.


CIWS:

Kashtan CIWS (equivalent to Phalanx): Mounting retractable Kashtan CIWS turrets would offer point defense. Ideally, 2–4 turrets could be installed across the submarine’s hull. Each Kashtan turret includes two 30mm guns and four 9M311 missiles, providing a final defense layer against incoming threats.




3. Layered Air Defense Layout:

Long Range: S-300F Rif-M (SA-N-6) missiles for intercepting high-altitude threats.

Medium Range: 9M317M (SA-N-12 Grizzly) for intercepting intermediate threats.

Short Range: Tor-M2 (SA-N-9 Gauntlet) for close-range intercepts of missiles or aircraft.

Point Defense: Kashtan CIWS turrets for last-resort interception, especially useful against missile saturation attacks.




Tactical and Strategic Doctrine

1. Strategic Role:

These AAW-modified Delta III submarines would act as mobile air defense platforms, supporting offensive naval operations in areas with significant air threat, like the Norwegian Sea, the North Atlantic, or near critical NATO bases.

By enhancing air defense in otherwise vulnerable regions, these subs would create “no-fly zones,” complicating enemy air superiority and deterring maritime patrol aircraft, reducing the detection risk for accompanying Soviet submarines and surface ships.



2. Tactical Doctrine:

Operational Pairing with Akula II-class SSNs: The Delta III would be escorted by Akula II submarines, acting as hunter-killers to protect the AAW submarine from enemy SSNs and ASW assets. This combination would form a specialized battle group:

The Delta III’s role would be to create an aerial shield over the battle group, intercepting hostile aircraft, ASW helicopters, and long-range ASW weapons.

The Akula IIs would maintain a defensive perimeter against underwater threats, extending the survivability of the AAW Delta III.


Offensive Escort Missions: The Delta III could lead formations into contested waters, suppressing enemy air patrols while Akula IIs target surface and submarine threats.




Production Estimates and Conversion Feasibility

1. Production of New Units:

Assuming the Soviet Union’s thriving economic condition, it’s plausible that 2–3 newly-built Delta III variants per year could be commissioned starting around 1992. By 1998, this would result in approximately 12–15 new AAW Delta III submarines.



2. Conversions of Existing Delta III Units:

The USSR had initially built 14 Delta III submarines. Converting older Delta IIIs to AAW could feasibly start in the early 1990s, with each conversion taking 18–24 months. Realistically, 5–7 Delta IIIs could be converted by 1998, retaining the latest, best-conditioned vessels for conversion.




Overall Impact

The development of these anti-air-focused Delta III variants would represent a significant shift in Soviet naval doctrine, as it would allow submarines to play a more versatile role in fleet defense. Paired with Akula II SSNs, they could project force in high-threat areas, challenging NATO’s air and naval dominance and securing the Soviet Union’s ability to conduct strategic naval operations in contested waters.

This concept seems unlikely, although the Soviets did toy with some crazy submarine concepts in the early Cold War (a cargo submarine capable of carrying 10 T-34-85s was among them).

I think it unlikely the Soviets would build an anti-air submarine in the 1990s. My understanding of Soviet doctrine is that submarines were intended for a) sinking other submarines b) sinking American aircraft carrier battle groups with nuclear warheads c) launching SLBMs.

One option for a dramatic change in the Soviet submarine force is having the never built Oscar class submarines carry the Poseidon intercontinental nuclear torpedo. This project actually began development in the 1980s as a counter to SDI. That said, whether the Soviets would actually build it depends on the politics in your alternate history. Is the START treaty and general detente 2.0 happening? Or is it kinda like where Andropov lived longer and sorta reformed the economy like China's, but maintained suspicion and distrust of the US?

Of course, the Poseidon might only make sense to include in a big nuclear war scenario.

kahta wrote: Sat Oct 26, 2024 1:39 am I asked chatgpt for suggestions on how to upgrade the kirov. What do others think of this?

Hypothetical Upgrades to Kirov-Class Ships by 1998 in a Thriving Soviet Union

In a scenario where the Soviet Union survived and continued to thrive economically, the Kirov-class battlecruisers would likely have received significant upgrades by 1998 to maintain their status as formidable naval assets. Below are specific weapons and electronic warfare (EW) systems that could have been integrated, considering technology available up to 2004.


---

1. Missile Systems Enhancements

Anti-Ship Missiles: Upgrade from the P-700 Granit (SS-N-19 Shipwreck) to the P-800 Oniks (SS-N-26 Strobile) supersonic anti-ship cruise missiles. The Oniks offers improved speed (up to Mach 2.5), range (up to 300 km), and advanced guidance systems resistant to electronic countermeasures.

Land-Attack Capability: Integration of the 3M14 Kalibr (SS-N-27 Sizzler) land-attack cruise missiles, providing the ability to strike ground targets with high precision at ranges up to 2,500 km.

Vertical Launch Systems (VLS): Installation of universal VLS cells to replace older missile launchers, allowing for a more flexible loadout of missiles, including anti-ship, land-attack, and anti-submarine variants.


2. Air Defense Upgrades

Long-Range Surface-to-Air Missiles (SAMs): Upgrade the S-300F (SA-N-6 Grumble) system to the S-300FM (SA-N-20 Gargoyle) variant, featuring improved 48N6 missiles with enhanced range (up to 150 km) and better engagement capabilities against modern aircraft and missiles.

Medium-Range Air Defense: Addition of the 9M317M (SA-N-12 Grizzly) missiles as part of the Shtil-1 system, offering improved defense against anti-ship missiles and aircraft at medium ranges.

Close-In Weapon Systems (CIWS): Replacement of older AK-630 CIWS with the Kashtan-M (CADS-N-1) system, combining 30mm Gatling guns with 9M311 missiles for layered defense against incoming threats.


3. Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW) Improvements

ASW Missile System: Installation of the RPK-9 Medvedka (SS-N-29) ASW missile system, enabling rapid response to submarine threats by delivering lightweight torpedoes over distances up to 20 km.

Advanced Torpedoes: Upgrade to UGST (Physicist) heavyweight torpedoes, featuring improved speed, range, and guidance systems for engaging enemy submarines and surface ships.


4. Electronic Warfare and Sensor Suite

Radar Systems:

Air/Surface Search Radar: Upgrade to the Fregat-MAE-5 3D radar, enhancing detection range and target tracking capabilities for both air and surface contacts.

Fire Control Radar: Implementation of the MR-750 Fregat-M2EM radar for improved missile guidance and engagement accuracy.


Sonar Systems:

Hull-Mounted Sonar: Upgrade to the Zarya-ME sonar system for better submarine detection and tracking.

Towed Array Sonar: Addition of the Vignette-EM towed array for enhanced passive detection of quiet submarines.


Electronic Countermeasures (ECM):

TK-25E-5 ECM Suite: Provides advanced jamming and deception capabilities against enemy radars and guided weapons.

PK-10 and PK-16 Decoy Launchers: Deploy chaff and IR decoys to confuse incoming missiles.



5. Artillery and Gun Systems

Main Gun Upgrade: Replacement of the AK-130 dual 130mm guns with the A-192M Armat 130mm naval gun, offering higher rate of fire and improved accuracy due to advanced fire control systems.

Secondary Artillery: Addition of Duet twin 30mm automated gun mounts for close-in defense against small surface threats and low-flying aircraft.


6. Repurposing Helicopter Facilities

With the removal of helicopters, the hangar and flight deck space can be utilized for:

Expanded VLS Capacity: Installing additional VLS cells to increase the number of missiles carried, enhancing sustained combat operations.

Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs): Deployment of early tactical UAVs like the Tipchak system for reconnaissance, surveillance, and target acquisition, extending situational awareness without manned helicopters.


7. Additional Defensive Systems

Hard-Kill Anti-Torpedo Defense: Implementation of the UDAV-1M anti-torpedo system, capable of launching countermeasures and small rockets to intercept incoming torpedoes.

Integrated Air Defense System: Upgraded combat information center to coordinate all air defense assets more effectively, creating a multi-layered defense network.


8. Propulsion and Power Generation

Reactor Modernization: Enhancements to the KN-3 nuclear reactors for increased efficiency, reliability, and safety, potentially extending the time between refueling and maintenance.

Electrical Power Upgrades: Installation of more powerful generators and distribution systems to support new electronics and weaponry, ensuring optimal performance of all systems.


9. Command and Control Enhancements

Combat Management System: Integration of the Sigma-E combat management system for improved data processing, threat evaluation, and weapon assignment, allowing for faster reaction times in complex combat scenarios.

Communication Systems: Upgraded secure communication links, including satellite communication capabilities, to maintain robust connectivity with naval command and other assets.


10. Crew Accommodations and Automation

Automation Technologies: Introduction of advanced automation in weapon systems and ship operations to reduce crew workload and size, leading to cost savings and increased efficiency.

Improved Living Conditions: Renovation of crew quarters with better amenities to enhance morale and habitability during extended deployments.



---

Summary

These incremental upgrades would transform the Kirov-class ships into even more powerful and versatile platforms, capable of projecting power and defending against a wide range of threats. By incorporating advanced missile systems, superior electronic warfare capabilities, and modernized sensors and weaponry, the Soviet Navy would maintain a significant strategic advantage at sea.

In regards to this Kirov upgrade, it probably would have been P-800 only. During the real life Soviet era, Kalibr was intended first as a submarine weapon and then as a possible cheaper alternative to the P-800. But if the Soviet economy is booming in your timeline, Kalibr will probably remain for subs only and Kirov class will get P-800.

There would likely also be no VLS upgrade. IRL the reason why this is planned is because P-800 is too expensive.

By the way, in the event that the INF treaty exists in your timeline, there would probably never be a land attack version of Kalibr because the Soviets never really saw a need for conventional missiles like that, only nuclear. Even if the Gulf War still happens and the world finds out how great TLAMs fired en mass from submarines are, a conventional land attack cruise missile still does not fit into Soviet submarine doctrine, at least not what their doctrine would look like in the 1990s.

kahta wrote: Fri Oct 25, 2024 4:38 am Assume this backdrop:

The Soviet Union boomed economically during the 1980s as a result of a prolonged energy crisis and did not fall. Substantial investments were made in a blue water fleet.

What refits do they do with to aging Soviet ships?

What else do they build?

Which historically delayed weapons systems get deployed earlier?

They probably would have built what they intended to but had to cancel. I can provide some more details to what TempestII listed.

Aviation cruisers-
Pr.1143.7 class CATOBAR carrier "Ulyanovsk"- due to enter service in December 1995.
Pr.1143.6 class STOBAR carrier "Riga"- sister ship of Leonid Brezhnev, launched in 1988. I would estimate entry into service in 1993, just loosely based on how long it took to get Admiral Kuznetsov into service IRL.
Pr.1143.5 class STOBAR carrier "Leonid Brezhnev"- assuming your scenario has no Perestroika or Glasnost, there will probably be no renaming of Brezhnev to Tblisi and then Admiral Kuznetsov, as he will remain a revered figure in Soviet politics. Commissioned in 1991, historically IRL there appear to have been no major delays caused by the economic crisis.

Cruisers-
Pr.1144 class x7- Kirov, Frunze, Kalinin, Kuybyshev (enters service 1992), Admiral Kuznetsov (enters service 1996), Rossiya (enters service 2000), Varyag (enters service 2004) *based on how the 3 Kirov ships completed during Soviet times entered service every 4 years.

Destroyers-
Pr.956 class [NATO Reporting Name: Sovremenny]- 2x Pr.956A; Vazhny, Vdumchivy (these were historically completed and sold to China), Pr.956U x3; Buyny, Vnutymelny, Vechny.
About Pr.956U- the project entailed removing the P-270 launchers and replacing them with P-800 launchers. The aft 130mm gun would be removed and replaced by a VLS for 16x Kalibr. All AK-630 mounts and RBU-1000 launchers would be removed. In place of the AK-630s would be 2x Kashtan CIWS turret. The Mineral FCS radar would be replaced with a new "Monument" FCS radar.
In addition, another standard Pr.956, Vnushytelny, might have entered service. Construction stopped in 1987 IRL, probably due to reductions in military spending.

Large ASW ships-
Pr.1155.1 class [NATO Reporting Name: Udaloy II] x10- Admiral Chabanenko, Admiral Basisty, Admiral Kucherov + 7 others that did not receive names before the dissolution; 2 shipyards would probably build these at a rate of 2x every 2-3 years.

Submarines-
Pr.949A [NATO Reporting Name: Oscar II] class SSGN- besides the ones completed IRL, six more were planned but never completed. The last three were planned as "Pr.949U" but I can't find any details on what this modification entailed.
Pr.971 [NATO Reporting Name: Akula] class SSN- besides the ones completed IRL, 3 more were planned for the Pacific Fleet and 2 more for the Northern Fleet. All probably would have been in service not later than 1996, based on the time it took to build them before the economic crisis intensified.

Note that the Project 11780 class LHD that you can find in the DB3000 would not have entered service, this project was cancelled in the early 80s in favor of building the Pr.1143.5 aircraft carrier. Some smaller amphibious assault ships were planned to see construction, but I'm not as familiar with these and assume you are focusing more on blue water naval combat for your scenario.

Again assuming you are focusing on naval combat, Su-33 will be the main air superiority fighter for the ship-based fighter aviation regiments of the new aircraft carriers. IRL the government focused on the Su-33 due to funding limitations, but because those don't exist in your timeline, the MiG-29K will probably be adopted. In terms of doctrine the Su-33 plays a similar role to the F-14, while the MiG-29K is an analogue to the F/A-18.

Loose guess for the Ulyanovsk's air group: 36x Su-33 (three squadrons worth), 24x MiG-29K (two squadrons worth) + Yak-44 AWACS x4, Ka-27PLO ASW helo x16, and Ka-27PS rescue helo x2 as per Wiki.

Brezhnev and Riga would get their planned air groups as well (not the reduced version resulting from the economic crisis in Russia): 13x Su-33, 13x MiG-29K, 4x Ka-31, 18x Ka-27PLO, 2x Ka-27PS.

Tu-16s in naval aviation would be completely replaced by Tu-22M. Tu-22M4 might see production but go to the Air Force, perhaps resulting in transfer of older Tu-22M3s to the navy.

This is great info. Is your source a physical book or website?

kahta wrote: Thu Oct 31, 2024 7:59 pm This is great info. Is your source a physical book or website?

Mix of English and Russian Wikipedia. For that submarine with the 10x T-34, it comes from the book Stalin's Ocean-Going Fleet, by Jurgen Rohwer and Mikhail Monakov.

Likely already mentioned supercarrier Ulyanovsk was stopped after the dissolution of the SU.
Second Kuznetsov class carrier, the Varyag aswell.
Carrier-based Jak-44 same reason (replaced by cheaper Ka-31).

Thanks for the feedback everyone.

Please find a thread here with the ships that I have modified based on my own research and the feedback here.
https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/view ... 3&t=407054

Thanks for posting this and for all the replies. I’m also interested in this and have been considering making similar scenarios but based on the 2020s. I would assume the INF is not in place and that the soviets and china share military technology. Thus soviets have some of the china UAVs and ballistic missiles.

Some additional Soviet units would be:
CVN Shtorm
CG (Or CGN) Lider
DDG Super Gorshkov

Any other suggestions?

orca wrote: Tue Nov 05, 2024 3:20 pm Thanks for posting this and for all the replies. I’m also interested in this and have been considering making similar scenarios but based on the 2020s. I would assume the INF is not in place and that the soviets and china share military technology. Thus soviets have some of the china UAVs and ballistic missiles.

Some additional Soviet units would be:
CVN Shtorm
CG (Or CGN) Lider
DDG Super Gorshkov

Any other suggestions?

I have not looked beyond the 90s because it's tough to say what would happen more than 10 years out, but would be happy to collaborate with you on trying to have a cohesive alternative history universe of equipment.