SUBSIM Radio Room Forums - View Single Post

AzureSkies · 02-19-20, 11:29 PM

Hello again, everyone!

Those who know the Soviet Navy well recognized this ship - it's pretty distinctive as a very WWII-esque ship for the 80's.

Well, because it was designed right around that time.

Here it is, the Project 68bis, NATO designation: Sverdlov-class.

They were approved in 1947 and commissioned in '52. The three goals of the Soviet Navy at the time were defending the Russian coastline, developing a capability to operate out of naval bases anywhere in the world, and to hold control over the Arctic, Baltic, Mediterranean and Black Seas.

Commerce raiding and maintaining a political presence in the third world were only secondary goals of the ship design. But given its total lack of missiles of any kind, commerce ships became just about the only targets it could manage.

Its guns and armor were formidable enough that it concerned British admirals, and ultimately the response to this ship and similar-sized large Soviet cruisers was the Blackburn Buccaneer, which could use toss bombing to put nuclear weapons on such ships from outside of range of their 37mm AA guns.

Zooming in a bit to get some of the smaller details on the 37mm AA guns...

Although most sources don't seem to mention it, by the early 60s one source claims no Sverdlov ships had any of their torpedo tubes left (having been removed). I found a number of images from the 60s, 70s, and 80s of Sverdlovs missing their torpedo racks, and none with them, so so far I've taken this source as accurate, but adding them back in would be very easy if there's proof to the contrary.

By 1983, aside from the command ship variant which were a small minority, almost half the fleet of Sverdlovs were still 68bis, while the other half were modernized with a large (8 total!) battery of AK230 point defense guns as the Project 68A. The 68A will be modeled for Blue Water soon.

Despite being gun cruisers, the rate of fire of the entire 12-gun battery of 152mm (6") guns could only put out a rate of fire similar to a Spruance-class destroyer, using modern loading mechanisms.

By 1983, the ships were mostly relegated to reserve status. Undoubtably, though, WW3 would have found use for them. Much like the US' Iowas, the guns were still useful for ground support. And while 6" guns are much smaller than 16", they're still much larger than 3" or even 5".

Furthermore, although the value of a WWII-era cruiser may seem even laughable in a modern theater, the large point defense batteries of the 68 A may be extremely useful, and even for the 68bis, its armor was extensive.

With a 100mm belt, 50mm deck armor, 150mm on the conning tower, and 175mm of armor on the turrets, and its large tonnage at 13,600-16,640 tons, it has the potential to shrug off far more punishment than all of its contemporaries except perhaps the Kirov, Iowas, and aircraft carriers.

For a class which still had 9 ships in reserve in 1983 (discounting the Pacific Fleet, which had 4 more), 3 of which were 68As, that's a very impressive level to be punching on.

One thing to remember is in a prolonged engagement or campaign, missiles are very limited. Combined with SAMs of other ships in the fleet, decoys, and point defense guns (which the 68A has in troves), It's not impossible that the Sverdlov could endure to the point where enemy ships are forced into a kind of engagement they were hardly meant for - but that the Sverdlov was built for, and excels at.

Far faster than almost any transport ships (32 knots, able to keep up with modern battle groups at top speed) and with plenty of ammo where missiles are in short supply, the Sverdlov may prove to be surprisingly potent even in the age of missiles and jet aircraft, when the conditions are right, it's deployed alongside ships with competent air and submarine defense, and the commander is clever.

I look forward to seeing how commanders make use of it, given I think it's likely it may endure the missile exchanges. It being just a knot or two slower than warships will make using its guns difficult and require intelligent positioning, or even other clever tactics to impede hostile ships' paths. But it certainly gives NATO commanders a conundrum on where to place their missiles, given the 68 may be able to tank quite a bit of damage, and the 68A may turn out to be a missile grinder, but they're certainly not ships you want to leave floating when all harpoons have been expended, and armored belts may make a joke of RIM-66s and 5" guns.

Add in how most transports can only manage half its speed, and in the right circumstances, it may prove useful as a commerce raider even in the early 80's.

Thanks for joining us, as always, feel free to comment, ask, and discuss below, and until next time, clear sailing.

02-19-20, 11:29 PM	#189
AzureSkies Blue Water Dev Join Date: Feb 2019 Posts: 95 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	VEHICLE HIGHLIGHT Hello again, everyone! Those who know the Soviet Navy well recognized this ship - it's pretty distinctive as a very WWII-esque ship for the 80's. Well, because it was designed right around that time. Here it is, the Project 68bis, NATO designation: Sverdlov-class. They were approved in 1947 and commissioned in '52. The three goals of the Soviet Navy at the time were defending the Russian coastline, developing a capability to operate out of naval bases anywhere in the world, and to hold control over the Arctic, Baltic, Mediterranean and Black Seas. Commerce raiding and maintaining a political presence in the third world were only secondary goals of the ship design. But given its total lack of missiles of any kind, commerce ships became just about the only targets it could manage. Its guns and armor were formidable enough that it concerned British admirals, and ultimately the response to this ship and similar-sized large Soviet cruisers was the Blackburn Buccaneer, which could use toss bombing to put nuclear weapons on such ships from outside of range of their 37mm AA guns. Zooming in a bit to get some of the smaller details on the 37mm AA guns... Although most sources don't seem to mention it, by the early 60s one source claims no Sverdlov ships had any of their torpedo tubes left (having been removed). I found a number of images from the 60s, 70s, and 80s of Sverdlovs missing their torpedo racks, and none with them, so so far I've taken this source as accurate, but adding them back in would be very easy if there's proof to the contrary. By 1983, aside from the command ship variant which were a small minority, almost half the fleet of Sverdlovs were still 68bis, while the other half were modernized with a large (8 total!) battery of AK230 point defense guns as the Project 68A. The 68A will be modeled for Blue Water soon. Despite being gun cruisers, the rate of fire of the entire 12-gun battery of 152mm (6") guns could only put out a rate of fire similar to a Spruance-class destroyer, using modern loading mechanisms. By 1983, the ships were mostly relegated to reserve status. Undoubtably, though, WW3 would have found use for them. Much like the US' Iowas, the guns were still useful for ground support. And while 6" guns are much smaller than 16", they're still much larger than 3" or even 5". Furthermore, although the value of a WWII-era cruiser may seem even laughable in a modern theater, the large point defense batteries of the 68 A may be extremely useful, and even for the 68bis, its armor was extensive. With a 100mm belt, 50mm deck armor, 150mm on the conning tower, and 175mm of armor on the turrets, and its large tonnage at 13,600-16,640 tons, it has the potential to shrug off far more punishment than all of its contemporaries except perhaps the Kirov, Iowas, and aircraft carriers. For a class which still had 9 ships in reserve in 1983 (discounting the Pacific Fleet, which had 4 more), 3 of which were 68As, that's a very impressive level to be punching on. One thing to remember is in a prolonged engagement or campaign, missiles are very limited. Combined with SAMs of other ships in the fleet, decoys, and point defense guns (which the 68A has in troves), It's not impossible that the Sverdlov could endure to the point where enemy ships are forced into a kind of engagement they were hardly meant for - but that the Sverdlov was built for, and excels at. Far faster than almost any transport ships (32 knots, able to keep up with modern battle groups at top speed) and with plenty of ammo where missiles are in short supply, the Sverdlov may prove to be surprisingly potent even in the age of missiles and jet aircraft, when the conditions are right, it's deployed alongside ships with competent air and submarine defense, and the commander is clever. I look forward to seeing how commanders make use of it, given I think it's likely it may endure the missile exchanges. It being just a knot or two slower than warships will make using its guns difficult and require intelligent positioning, or even other clever tactics to impede hostile ships' paths. But it certainly gives NATO commanders a conundrum on where to place their missiles, given the 68 may be able to tank quite a bit of damage, and the 68A may turn out to be a missile grinder, but they're certainly not ships you want to leave floating when all harpoons have been expended, and armored belts may make a joke of RIM-66s and 5" guns. Add in how most transports can only manage half its speed, and in the right circumstances, it may prove useful as a commerce raider even in the early 80's. Thanks for joining us, as always, feel free to comment, ask, and discuss below, and until next time, clear sailing. Last edited by AzureSkies; 02-25-20 at 08:09 PM.