SOVIET NAVY (USSR)

Project history: This was the first true Soviet postwar destroyer, mounting dual-purpose guns intended to survive against radioactive fallout. The 188-destroyer 1946-55 Plan envisaged construction of 118 of these ships (the other 70 were project 30bis). Three postwar alternatives were considered. One was a modified Project 48 destroyer leader (2740/3460t, 127.6x12.2x4.58m, 3 shafts, 81000shp, 37.5kts). The large-ship design bureau, TsKB-17, designed Project 40 in both forecastle and flush-deck versions (3296/4050t or 3250/4000t, 135.0x13.0x4.45-4.42m, 2 shafts, 76000shp, 35.8kts). TsKB-53, the destroyer bureau, designed Project 41 (3010/3820t, 133.4x13.6x4.42m, 2 shafts, 66000shp, 36kts). Project 48 had three twin 130mm single-purpose mounts (plus one twin 85mm, three twin 37mm and two twin 12.7mm MGs ,and two twin torpedo tubes). Project 40 had three twin dual-purpose mounts (130mm SM-2) plus six twin 45mm and two quintuple torpedo tubes. Project 41 had only two twin 130mm dual-purpose mounts, plus four twin 45mm and two quadruple 25mm, and two quadruple torpedo tubes. Project 48 was apparently rejected as obsolete, given its single-purpose guns (the two surviving ships of this type were broken up incomplete). Project 40 was rejected as too large for mass production.

    Project 41, the smallest and simplest alternative, was selected. Ironically, it would soon be dropped as too large. When the TTZ was approved on 14 June 1947, production of 110 ships was planned. The draft design was approved 19 August 1948, and the technical design on 28 September 1949.

    The flush-deck hull had two continuous internal decks, providing protected fore-aft access. It was nearly completely welded and was designed for prefabrication. The Project 41 destroyer was designed to remain afloat with three adjacent compartments flooded (two on Project 30bis). Spinter armour (8-10mm and 20mm thick) protected the fire controls, bridge, machinery-boiler casings, and weapons. Since all air ports were omitted (for nuclear protection), the design introduced radiator heating and air conditioning into Soviet destroyer practice.

    The ship introduced pressure-fired KV-41 boilers producing high-pressure, high-temperature steam at 64kg/cm². Compared to the conventional steam plant on Project 30bis, this one was smaller and 100t lighter, at economical speed it consumed 20% less fuel. Most importantly, it could be lit off without being warmed up. Trials showed, however, that the turbines were inefficient; at full power they required about 10% more steam than expected. Essentially this steam plant was used in all the later major steam combatants: Projects 56, 57bis, 58, 1134/1134A, 1123, the carriers, and presumably also 1164 and 956 Projects.

    Trials were not altogether successful. The ship made only 33.5kts on 64,200shp, and endurance at 14kts was 5210nm rather than the 5500nm specified. The unfortunate bow form made tor excessive spray forward, so the forward 130mm and 45mm mounts were difficult to operate. The ship vibrated badly aft. She did not answer her helm when backing down. It was soon clear that the arrangement of light AA guns on the sides of the ship made it difficult to engage targets forward or abaft the ship.

    However, the project died even before the ship departed for trials. Someone, it is not quite clear who, decided that the ship was too large; in June 1951 Project 41 was cancelled and incomplete hulls broken up. Later plans were sold to China to become the basis for the 'Luda' design. Recent accounts of Project 41 emphasise that the ship's size provided a valuable margin for modernization. TsKB-53 was ordered to design more compact version of Project 41 which became Protect 56.