Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Share
    avatar
    Stealthflanker

    Posts : 801
    Points : 885
    Join date : 2009-08-04
    Age : 29
    Location : Indonesia

    3R41 Volna Why it's so different than 5N63S

    Post  Stealthflanker on Wed Jul 24, 2013 2:21 pm



    Well..this is the 3R41 Volna used in Slava and Kirov for guidance of S-300F.

    One thing i wondered for quite long time was.. why this Radar was designed that way... I mean well the land based 5N63S for S-300P family use backplane feed where the transmit and receive feed is located behind the phased array antenna. But 3R41.. it use different arrangement referred as reflective phased array where the feed is located ahead of the array.

    Would be nice though if one can enlighten me on that subject.
    avatar
    Sujoy

    Posts : 903
    Points : 1069
    Join date : 2012-04-02
    Location : India

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Sujoy on Wed Jul 24, 2013 9:39 pm

    The phasing principle of the 3R41 Volna is different from a conventional phased array radar  .

    Instead of individual transciever elements, 3R41 Volna has a central feed (the nib on the center of the radome) which reflects phase-changed transmissions off a flat surface. 3R41 operates in the J-band.  3R41 applies it's phase changes to a flat array that acts as a reflector for the feed mounted on the radome .

    The small hemispheric radome is associated with the missile control system. The three long dielectric features on the sensor’s front are a  part of some sort of diagnostic subsystem, or an ECCM device .
    avatar
    Stealthflanker

    Posts : 801
    Points : 885
    Join date : 2009-08-04
    Age : 29
    Location : Indonesia

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Stealthflanker on Thu Jul 25, 2013 1:42 pm

    Sujoy wrote:The phasing principle of the 3R41 Volna is different from a conventional phased array radar  .

    Instead of individual transciever elements, 3R41 Volna has a central feed (the nib on the center of the radome) which reflects phase-changed transmissions off a flat surface. 3R41 operates in the J-band.  3R41 applies it's phase changes to a flat array that acts as a reflector for the feed mounted on the radome .

    The small hemispheric radome is associated with the  missile control system. The three long dielectric features on the sensor’s front are  a  part of some sort of diagnostic subsystem, or an ECCM device .

    I know..as i mentioned above the Volna is a Reflective phased array. The question is why it has to be like that.. Given that the S-300 family use backplane feed like one in 5N63S.

    I don't think there are any technical difficulties in making naval variant of the 5N63S..considering that today's Kirov use navalized 30N6 with backplane feed.

    There should be another reason which make me curious.

    Vann7

    Posts : 3472
    Points : 3584
    Join date : 2012-05-16

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Vann7 on Thu Aug 29, 2013 6:30 pm

    GarryB wrote:Actually that is not true... AEGIS is a naval based battle management system that takes data from sonar, radar and other sensors and combines them into a subsurface, surface, and air picture to help defend carrier battle groups at sea.

    Only recently has it acquired any ABM capability.

    The Russian Navy equivalent of AEGIS is called Sigma and pretty much does the same thing of combining data from subsurface, sea, land, air and space assets to provide a complete picture of the battlespace and can be used to direct the defence of assets.

    Even the smallest new Russian Corvette is being fitted with Sigma and the standard cruise missile VLS and SAM VLS systems. A tiny Corvette could use data from a carrier 500km away to launch a 400km range SAM at a target 300km away from the Corvette and 200km from the carrier using data from the carriers AWACS aircraft... not many other corvettes have that capacity.

    im wondering about your opinions about the claims of an user in another forum about Russia navy defense capabilities.. He told..


    Both AEGIS and the UK/French PAAMS are designed to counter "saturated attacks" of high performance, supersonic anti-ship missiles and aircraft. No Soviet missile would penetrate the defense systems of ANY AEGIS or PAAMS equipped warship.

    I would put PAAMS slightly above AEGIS in terms of air-defense capabilities - however AEGIS will regain parity or even exceed PAAMs in the near future (upgrades etc).

    Apart from AEGIS and PAAMS there is no other naval air-defense system that even comes close.

    The Chinese type 052C and future 052D destroyers are equipped with advanced AESA multi-function radars and long-range SAMs to provide similar capabilities of Western AEGIS/PAAMS systems. But we can safely assume that the Chinese "AEGIS" is still inferior to the Western systems. The Indian Navy is also developing its own "AEGIS" system in the new P-15A (Kolkata-class) and P-15B destroyers. But again, like the Chinese system it is still inferior to Western AEGIS and PAAMS. Germany and the Netherlands have also developed their own "AEGIS" like systems.

    The Russians as of yet have not developed any capable naval air defense systems and their fleet will still be vulnerable to anti-ship missiles like the Harpoon or Exocet.

    He seems a fanboy but not sure of any of his claims.. whats your take about his comments?
    it was in defense pk forums . can post the link of the conversation if you want.

    avatar
    TR1

    Posts : 5681
    Points : 5709
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  TR1 on Thu Aug 29, 2013 10:03 pm

    Russian fleet vulnerable to pedestrian missiles like Exocet and Harpoon?

    Excuse me while I laugh my ass off.

    ALso I love the certainty that he has that no Soviet missile would penetrate AEGIS.
    Sounds like a fanboy alright.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16397
    Points : 17012
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  GarryB on Fri Aug 30, 2013 1:04 pm

    No Soviet missile would penetrate the defense systems of ANY AEGIS or PAAMS equipped warship.
    An Iranian Airbus almost got through an AEGIS destroyers defences... the first shot they tried to fire failed and it was the second missile they fired within Iranian waters that murdered the 290 odd people on board.

    Moskit was in service in the early 1980s and it underflew AEGIS easily... the only defence the US Navy had on their AEGIS class cruisers that would get a shot at a Moskit was Phalanx and it is being replaced by SEA RAM because it can't hit low flying targets.

    No Soviet missile would penetrate the defense systems of ANY AEGIS or PAAMS equipped warship.
    A very strong statement. Does he know that on paper those Exocets used by Argentina against British warships should also have failed miserably as Britain had Exocets and knew all about them and the Sea Wolf was on paper able to shoot them down with ease... yet so many ships sunk.

    Apart from AEGIS and PAAMS there is no other naval air-defense system that even comes close.
    You are paying too much attention to what he is actually saying and ignoring what he is not saying.

    He clearly has an interest and has researched AEGIS and PAAMS, though to what level is not clear, the problem is clearly that he obviously knows nothing about Russian Naval air defence systems or development in that direction... what he really should be saying is:

    Apart from AEGIS and PAAMS there is no other naval air-defense system that I know of that even comes close in performance to the performance that I believe AEGIS and PAAMS has.

    Which I think you will agree can fail on two counts... over estimation of the performance of the systems compounded by his ignorance of any other system including new Russia weapons and their deployment.

    For years the USN has been quite worried about Moskit and its replacement Onyx, and also the Klub missile with a long range subsonic carrier missile with a mach 2.8 high speed rocket propelled terminal component... not to mention the service entry in the next decade of the hypersonic Brahmos II and Zirconium missiles... currently every new vessel made for the Russian navy is being fitted with UKSK launch bins from Corvette right up to carrier and all the subs as well to carry supersonic anti ship missiles and Tomahawk equivalents.

    The Russians as of yet have not developed any capable naval air defense systems and their fleet will still be vulnerable to anti-ship missiles like the Harpoon or Exocet.
    A single KASHTAN-M turret can engage up to 4 Harpoons or 4 Exocets at once and apart from light patrol boats I don't know of any Russian or Soviet vessel that just has one CIWS.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    Stealthflanker

    Posts : 801
    Points : 885
    Join date : 2009-08-04
    Age : 29
    Location : Indonesia

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Stealthflanker on Sat Aug 31, 2013 3:15 pm

    Vann7 wrote:
    im wondering about your opinions about the claims of an user in another forum about Russia navy defense capabilities.. He told..

    Both AEGIS and the UK/French PAAMS are designed to counter "saturated attacks" of high performance, supersonic anti-ship missiles and aircraft. No Soviet missile would penetrate the defense systems of ANY AEGIS or PAAMS equipped warship.

    I would put PAAMS slightly above AEGIS in terms of air-defense capabilities - however AEGIS will regain parity or even exceed PAAMs in the near future (upgrades etc).

    Apart from AEGIS and PAAMS there is no other naval air-defense system that even comes close.

    The Chinese type 052C and future 052D destroyers are equipped with advanced AESA multi-function radars and long-range SAMs to provide similar capabilities of Western AEGIS/PAAMS systems. But we can safely assume that the Chinese "AEGIS" is still inferior to the Western systems. The Indian Navy is also developing its own "AEGIS" system in the new P-15A (Kolkata-class) and P-15B destroyers. But again, like the Chinese system it is still inferior to Western AEGIS and PAAMS. Germany and the Netherlands have also developed their own "AEGIS" like systems.

    The Russians as of yet have not developed any capable naval air defense systems and their fleet will still be vulnerable to anti-ship missiles like the Harpoon or Exocet.

    He seems a fanboy but not sure of any of his claims.. whats your take about his comments?
    it was in defense pk forums . can post the link of the conversation if you want.

    Typical old arguments..no need to get really worked up on it.

    AEGIS air defense are still limited by how many fire control director it can carry... even with 100++ standards.. Arleigh burke can only at best engage three of them at long range because it only carries three directors. SM-6 may improve their case though.. but with advent of naval based 9M96's..they're equal.

    I Don't really buy of "Over The Horizon Engagement" capability of the SM-6's as it still relies on other platform who were happen to spot the target to contact the missile carrier before launch.

    Russian naval air defense are more comprehensive than their western counterpart.. just take Kashtans.. combination between missile and guns.. can engage more targets than any EU or US Close in systems except RAM...along with Klinok and naval version of OSA's .. All of them have their own Radar's Thus won't disturb each other.. meaning more targets can be engaged independently.

    And even nicer that Russian CIWS often come in pair... instead typical western arrangement which favor single fighter arrangement.. meaning that Russian CIWS can put more lead on the air.. increasing probability of destruction of AsHM's

    And odds are that if Soviet doctrine implemented.. There would be jammers directed at the radar's...though this can be dealt with ECCM's ... and not to mention Soviet ASHM's are armored.. won't be easily brought down by typical SAM fragmentation warhead.

    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16397
    Points : 17012
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  GarryB on Sun Sep 01, 2013 10:28 am

    It is similar to the situation on land... the Soviets spend a lot of money on their air defences on land and sea because the west spent a lot on air power.

    The Soviets have systems like Kashtan and soon Pantsir-S1 with two 6 barrel gatling guns and 8 ready to fire missiles and 24 reload missiles on an automatic ammo handling system... do you think that is because they have rather more experience with supersonic anti ship missiles?

    As StealthFlanker mentions the total number of on board SAMs is not as important as the number of missile director channels you have... SA-2 SAM sites with the capability of engaging one target at a time means two cruise missiles at once are a serious threat... Vityaz with 16 missile directors each able to control 2 missiles against 1 target means 16 targets can be engaged at once with the high speed of the missile meaning more targets can be engaged per minute than with older slower missiles.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Austin

    Posts : 6279
    Points : 6677
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Austin on Tue Oct 22, 2013 5:29 pm

    CB "Amethyst" has begun to develop a lightweight naval gun system "Kartaun-Puma"
    rusnavy.com

    Design Bureau "Amethyst" has begun to develop a lightweight naval gun system "Kartaun-Puma", which is easier to existing options to four times. It will equip light vehicles, so they will get heavy combat capabilities.

    According to "News" Deputy Director General Yury design office smoothly, managed to ease the weight of the unit due to composite materials.

    - It creates complex, including a gun and ammunition management system. Previous two-barrel gun was and weighed 97 tons, the - single-barrel and weighs 24 tons - through the application of new technical solutions and the introduction of new hardware components, including composite materials, - said Yuri smoothly.

    The principal difference between the perspective of the complex from the previous 130-millimeter plants - a unified fire control system that is compatible not only with any naval artillery systems, but also with complex land 'Beach'.

    - In contrast to the previous, the system creates a universal control for all kinds and for all artillery weapons of the Navy. It used to be - that neither the caliber, it has its own control system. Due to unification, we have reduced the number of management systems, reducing the number of devices. As a result, reduced cost, and at the same time we can control and 30 - and 130-mm gun, - said Yuri smoothly.

    The new complex will be able to get any ship whose design provides artillery. But above all, it will be installed on frigates of Project 22350 - "Admiral Kasatonov", "Admiral Golovko," etc.

    - All of our efforts have focused on weight reduction for this complex could be placed on a ship smaller displacement. Before, we could put the complex on the ships with a displacement of 6.7 tonnes, and now we can put it on ships with a displacement 2 tons This will enhance the combat capabilities of coastal and sea targets to the level of larger displacement ships, - said Yuri smoothly.

    "Kartaun-Puma" is created on the backlog of past development activities - in the complex will fire control system "Puma", the height of the gun will be about 12 m, the length of the barrel - 7-8 pm Just like the last gun "Armat" artillery can hit targets on the water, on the shore and in the air.

    - Compared to what it was before, in the short term, the firing range will be increased by about a factor of 1.5-2. Efficiency is also significantly increase, up to two times, this rate will exceed 30 cannon rounds per minute. Expected to increase reliability 1.5 times increase in the reaction rate of up to two seconds. To manage the new gun will require only three people instead of six, - said Yuri smoothly.

    Installation will be able to fire until it is completely use up ammunition - ammunition "Kartaun-Puma" will be equal to the capacity of the ship's cellar for shells, it is impossible for any foreign counterparts. Shoot 'Kartaun-Puma "will high-explosive, anti-aircraft and any other projectiles caliber 130 mm, including managed.

    - Earlier in the gun shells were submitted as a Kalashnikov rifle cartridges. Now this is a serious intelligent automation mechanisms guns, including ammunition feed system SAP 192-M. Without interrupting the shooting, you can fire up to exhaustion of all ammunition with automatic selection of the type of projectile - Back to the high-explosive anti-aircraft can be instantly. In addition, in this caliber we have a unitary shell, which is also an advantage over other countries - said smoothly.
    The installation will be ready for the start of 2015. To conduct R & D to create a new complex in the 2013-2014 year, KB "Amethyst" will receive 776 million rubles. Produce 130-millimeter artillery complex "Kartaun-Puma" will be of "MZ" arsenal. "
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16397
    Points : 17012
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    CB "Amethyst" has begun to develop a lightweight naval gun system "Kartaun-Puma"

    Post  GarryB on Tue Nov 05, 2013 10:26 pm

    Excellent news about the new gun... A-192M... reduced weight, increased range, ability to fire off its entire ammo load in one go (ie fully cooled to prevent overheating so it is able to provide continuous fire support) and small and light enough to be carried by Frigates... excellent news.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5359
    Points : 5592
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Werewolf on Mon Nov 11, 2013 3:39 am

    From where comes this russophobe weirdo that uses a russian weapon designation as a nickname?
    So much russophobic mumblings one after another i only have seen from hardcore polish,georgian,jews (zionistic),americans,majority of people from baltic countries or turkish people.
    Does that cover a place where you come from?

    ali.a.r

    Posts : 106
    Points : 111
    Join date : 2011-11-04

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  ali.a.r on Wed Nov 13, 2013 5:16 am

    Rpg type 7v wrote:

    well just 1 major flaw i can see is are you going to have the same number of short range sams as longrange sams because of uksk?
    i mean 1 tube fits all principle is flawed because missiles are of different sizes,short-medium-longrange A-A missile, or you going to have dedicated launchers?
    Not really.

    If for example one UKSK/Redut launch bin can hold one heavy/long-range missile, and a short-or-medium range missile has (for examples sake) half the diameter of the bigger missile, then you could fit four of the smaller missiles into one launch bin. So its entirely possible to carry combinations of different missiles, all using the same launch system.

    If a ship has 16 launch bins, it could carry (again, for examples sake, because I dunno the exact dimensions) 8 of the long range missiles like the 48N6 (each one taking up ONE launch bin) , and 32 9M96 medium range missiles (with 4 missiles in each bin).

    Rpg type 7v

    Posts : 394
    Points : 252
    Join date : 2011-05-01

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Rpg type 7v on Wed Nov 13, 2013 5:01 pm

    you are confused ,will they use uksk for sams or not?
    so 1 big longrange SAM ,or 4 medium SAMs of half diameter.
    if they use kastan ciws with its separate missiles ,why then another short range system in launchers?
    avatar
    TR1

    Posts : 5681
    Points : 5709
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  TR1 on Wed Nov 13, 2013 5:12 pm

    Neither Shtil VLS nor Redut uses UKSK.


    Rpg type 7v

    Posts : 394
    Points : 252
    Join date : 2011-05-01

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Rpg type 7v on Mon Nov 18, 2013 6:56 pm

    bramos yakhont is speed limited -and that gives it limited range, onyx has the same flying time but at higher ramjet speed of mach 3.5 which gives it more range..

    they just cant ,the russian naval industry in a state of chaos compared to well oiled american juggernaut....
    cruisers and destroyers should have at least longer ranged missiles compared to frigates but they cant because of UKSK lol! , what the point at constructing or sending cruiser when you can send a frigate with same capabilities pwnd ... and why not install naval s-400 to frigates then? Laughing 
    and just imagine some country sending a frigate they bought from russians before hostilities started and destroying their cruiser they sent ,crazy i know geek  cheers 
    avatar
    TR1

    Posts : 5681
    Points : 5709
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  TR1 on Mon Nov 18, 2013 7:03 pm

    What cruisers and destroyers?

    Dear god your argument sucks. Stop digging your hole farther.

    Rpg type 7v

    Posts : 394
    Points : 252
    Join date : 2011-05-01

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Rpg type 7v on Mon Nov 18, 2013 7:06 pm

    ah then its ok ,so the russians will have only frigates in their navy , i didnt get the memo sry , good for them ,regional power all the way.
    avatar
    TR1

    Posts : 5681
    Points : 5709
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  TR1 on Mon Nov 18, 2013 7:09 pm

    Let me translate: I tried to make the UKSK look bad, and made a fool of myself. Like always.

    Welcome to ignore list.

    Rpg type 7v

    Posts : 394
    Points : 252
    Join date : 2011-05-01

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Rpg type 7v on Mon Nov 18, 2013 7:12 pm

    so instead of a direct answer more rubbish , like your every single post on this topic , well good riddance i say ....

    Rpg type 7v

    Posts : 394
    Points : 252
    Join date : 2011-05-01

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Rpg type 7v on Tue Nov 19, 2013 6:32 pm

    i agree more defensive missiles can be added for a cruiser thats good, but the destroyers and cruisers will have same offensive capabilities as frigates... thats a poore decision.
    frigate can use s-300 missiles just like cruiser but ones with active radar guidance ,you just need a good command link to get it near the target.
    Lets say if it takes 8 onyxes to kill a ship, if you launch 16 from a frigate or 80 from a cruiser it doesnt matter , its just a waste of missiles and an overkill from a cruiser. and both ships go down.
    but if they include bigger faster longer range brahmos2 into cruisers then i concur.
    avatar
    runaway

    Posts : 348
    Points : 369
    Join date : 2010-11-12
    Location : Sweden

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  runaway on Tue Nov 19, 2013 7:24 pm

    Rpg type 7v wrote:i agree more defensive missiles can be added for a cruiser thats good, but the destroyers and cruisers will have same offensive capabilities as frigates... thats a poore decision.
    frigate can use s-300 missiles just like cruiser but ones with active radar guidance ,you just need a good command link to get it near the target.
    Lets say if it takes 8 onyxes to kill a ship, if you launch 16 from a frigate or 80 from a cruiser it doesnt matter , its just a waste of missiles and an overkill from a cruiser. and both ships go down.
    but if they include bigger faster longer range brahmos2 into cruisers then i concur.
    If you are 2000 NMI from replenishment its a hell of differens spending all your missiles in one go or have more for additional engagements.
    And fire 4 SSM missiles in a volley, 8, or as cruisers maybe 50-60 is also very different in offensive capability. It would be no sense to have Kirovs retain 20 Granit or similar SSM when they can have 80 with less warhead (400kg instead of 750) but with longer range 600km- 900km respectively.

    Personally i like Kh-31 fired from MiG29k, speed of mach 3.5 seaskimming and range 50km and 94kg warhead, but with mach 3.5 you dont need much of a warhead Wink 


    Rpg type 7v

    Posts : 394
    Points : 252
    Join date : 2011-05-01

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Rpg type 7v on Fri Nov 22, 2013 9:07 pm

    or you find him but have to get into range to get him and he finds you too in the meantime and send you a volley of missiles...
    well i guess im old fashioned...

    etaepsilonk

    Posts : 715
    Points : 697
    Join date : 2013-11-19

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  etaepsilonk on Fri Nov 22, 2013 9:17 pm

    Rpg type 7v wrote:or you find him but have to get into range to get him and he finds you too in the meantime and send you a volley of missiles...
    well i guess im old fashioned...
    No, you aren't. censored 

    Please show respect to other members.

    Whether you agree with their opinions or not they have a right to be wrong.

    Would say to other members... at the end of the day you waste your time and theirs if you argue and may find yourself on a break if you lose your temper and say the wrong thing, so if you feel frustrated or angry with a members reply stop and go an make a nice hot drink and think about how you feel about it and instead of abusing the messenger tell us how what they said made you feel. It gets your views across without abusing anyone.

    GarryB



    To rpg type 7v and GarryB:

    OK, I apologize to both of you, if you found my posts inappropriate. I had actually been expecting them to be humorous, rather than insulting. Anyway, that won't happen again.

    eek


    Last edited by etaepsilonk on Sat Nov 23, 2013 3:04 pm; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : Apology)

    Rpg type 7v

    Posts : 394
    Points : 252
    Join date : 2011-05-01

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Rpg type 7v on Fri Nov 22, 2013 9:20 pm

    censored  you just waited for a comment to get on the bandwagon...

    To be fair I should censor your post for name calling too... please keep this civilised.

    etaepsilonk

    Posts : 715
    Points : 697
    Join date : 2013-11-19

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  etaepsilonk on Fri Nov 22, 2013 10:01 pm

    Rpg type 7v wrote:and youre smart as a dodo. you just waited for a comment to get on the bandwagon...
    Yes, I am Smile 

    Sponsored content

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Sat Sep 23, 2017 11:07 am