They claim it will be done by October next year, there will probably be a 4th soon. At this rate in 2 years their numbers will eclipse the Gorshkov Class which it is an improved version of.

Implessive y/n?

even if they're all swimming it doesn't constitute a destroyer

>>64016415
Please define the line between frigate and destroyer.

>>64016440

>>64016440
Destroyer can act as flag ship.
Frigate cannot except in dire or unusual circumstances.
I realize this is retardation built on tradition but this is the Goddamn Navy we are speaking about.

>>64016450
>>64016457

They are significantly larger and more heavily armed than the ship they were based on and they are the fleet flagships replacing the new 'frigates' they built recently, at least until they build the planned cruisers.

>>64016354 (OP)
>improved
lmao

not bad overall; i like the looks of the design. it's somewhat a little too heavily armed (the obvious ballistic missile cells probably don't need to be there; cruise missiles are more than enough for a warship, especially your first major surface combatants).

I if were in the Russian Navy, and not already dead on the frontlines of the SMO, I'd kill myself out of shame.

>>64016477
It's 50+ feet longer and has a shitload more weapons, besides that the only real change is it using Nork anti ship and land attack missiles instead of Russian ones. Nork missiles usually outrange their Russian counterparts and recently have been demonstrating comparable accuracy.

>>64016502
They intend 'freedom of navigation' patrols off the US East coast and even the Gulf of America so loads of land attack missiles make sense.

From some of their statements they might even attempt to eventually base a few in Cuba or Venezuela which is mildly hilarious.

>2030: North Korea will have more warm water overseas ports than Russia

>>64016521
The Nork East coast fleet HQ being a few miles from the Russian one means that there will be continual and unending opportunities for mogging.

>>64016532
Possible port calls:
>Vietnam
>Russia
>Belarus
>Thailand
>Cambodia
>Burma
>Iran
>Theoretically UAE
>Somaliland if Ethiopia builds a port there
>South Africa
>Nicaragua
>Venezuela
>Cuba

Basing options:
>Russia (Baltic sea)
>Burma
>Venezuela
>Cuba
>Iran?

I'd love to see what the crew accom is like.

>>64016457
That's not really true.

At least in the USN destroyers don't have the room for an admirals staff to act as a flagship. Ticos (cruisers) have that extra room/equipment and would act as a flagship before a Burke (destroyer) would. Though often in the USN they're operating alongside a supercarrier (or LHD/LHA) which would fill the flagship role.

The next generation destroyer program (DDG(X)) is expected to have room for command staff and thus would be more capable of fulfilling a flagship role over current Burke DDGs.

>>64016598
Probably whatever the accommodation on a Gorshkov is like but clean, it very well might be better. Part of the increased size is for provisions and fuel since they intend long term overseas missions and they have no ports they can visit between them and the US West Coast.

>north korean standard hull and hand me down russian weapons and sensors
It's a total meme and no one's expecting anything else

>>64016579
>Possible port calls:
>Belarus

>>64016609
The Nork Fleets are typically commanded from the shore, since they will need a big communications and briefing room anyway if they are going to be doing long range patrols that shouldn't be a issue.

>>64016632
Besides the (new) rear CWIS everything is domestic, the missiles are at least comparable to anything Russia makes.

>>64016641
I keep forgetting that it's separate from Russia and land locked.

>The extra length is actually for wheels and rope

>>64016609
Gravely (DDG 107) did act as a flagship.
You are also correct, it is rare. But a frigate class acting as one would be even more abnormal. Borderline impossible unless every larger ship goes down and the ranking officer on the frigate just got salt promoted to Admiral.

>>64016652
Sure I'm just saying in US naval doctrine, destroyers generally aren't flagships. At least until the last decade or so as the Ticonderogas get retired. They rarely ever were flagships.

>>64016675
Logically they are only temporary flagships like the smaller frigates before them since the are planning (or even already constructing) heavy cruisers.

>>64016609
>The next generation destroyer program (DDG(X)) is expected to have room for command staff and thus would be more capable of fulfilling a flagship role over current Burke DDGs.
Flight IIIs are getting some of those upgrades too as the Ticos are being retired sooner than DDG(X) will be finished.

>>64016354 (OP)
>heli landing pad and no hangar
>mid section fixed radar array right behind the ciws
>dogshit russian ciws
>one ship already sank
Yeah real fuckin implessive

>>64016735
Plenty of ships have landing pads but no hanger and the CWIS is slightly less dogshit than most.

The tipping incident had nothing to do with the design and they already fixed that.

>>64016579
>Possible port calls:
lol
>Basing options:
lmao

>>64016809
Anon them and the Russians visit all the time, their respective fleet headquarters are within walking distance of each other.