Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Questions Thread: Russian Navy

    Share
    avatar
    Isos

    Posts : 2328
    Points : 2322
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: Questions Thread: Russian Navy

    Post  Isos on Fri Aug 04, 2017 6:43 pm

    Benya wrote:
    GarryB wrote:The Udaloy and Sovremmeny are difficult to upgrade with UKSK as the old missiles are heavily angled while the UKSK is not and is better penetrating the deck space 4-6 levels worth.

    Perhaps putting a hull extension could be an option, while replacing all the old material on board with new equipment should free up a lot of space internally.

    New sensors will be multifunction and should also take up rather less space too.

    I personally don't think that Udaloys or Sovremenniys will see large scale modernizations (or maybe just a little bit) for the following reasons:

    1.) There are around 5 Sovremenniys and 6 Udaloys in service, most of them are older than 30 years.

    2.) Sovremenniys were plagued with lots of issues with their propulsion systems, and developing a new would take additional time, while putting them into production would somewhat bog down current engine productions (at NPO Saturn for Gorshkovs or at Zvezda for Karakurts).

    3.) Combat readiness of both will be costlier and costlier to upkeep over time.

    4.) Equipping both classes with UKSKs would make little sense as by 2025 there would be around 6-7 Gorshkovs in service, and they could take on their duties for a while until a new destroyer class emerges.

    5.) Maybe or maybe not, these ships are not really of great strategic importance like Kirovs or Slavas. And don't get me wrong here, by this I don't mean that destroyers are less significant than cruisers, I only want to point out that these destroyers could serve 8-10 years from now just fine.

    In conclusion, I think that both current destroyer classes should serve until let's say early 2030s


    Sovs are dead ship. They don't even use them. For joint exercices they send slavas or udalois. They should replace them the faster they can by gorshkovs or 21956 destroyers. Chinese sovs on the other hand are newer with better engines and electronics, upgraded with VLS. Very good ships. Russians ones are too old to be modernized.

    Udaloys are good, they could give them Urans for anti ship capabilities. Udaloys II is very good but just 1 is in service.

    Slavas and kirivs are good but they have few of them. Thzy need frigates and destroyer to go with them.

    avatar
    franco

    Posts : 3029
    Points : 3061
    Join date : 2010-08-18

    Re: Questions Thread: Russian Navy

    Post  franco on Fri Aug 04, 2017 7:22 pm

    There are plans or talks to do a upgrade and life extension of some / all of the Udaloy's but have heard nothing in regards to the Sovremmeny. By the way I believe only 3 of them are still active (North, Baltic and Pacific). Would not be surprised if the Gorshkovs actually replace them.
    avatar
    DasVivo

    Posts : 13
    Points : 15
    Join date : 2015-12-12
    Location : Computer

    Re: Questions Thread: Russian Navy

    Post  DasVivo on Sat Aug 05, 2017 5:57 am

    franco wrote:There are plans or talks to do a upgrade and life extension of some / all of the Udaloy's but have heard nothing in regards to the Sovremmeny. By the way I believe only 3 of them are still active (North, Baltic and Pacific). Would not be surprised if the Gorshkovs actually replace them.

    Last I looked it appeared that:
    Bystryy - Pacific Fleet
    Nastoychivyy - Baltic Fleet
    Admiral Ushakov - Northern Fleet

    Burnyy - Pacific Fleet (Currently being overhauled, not a deep modernization)
    Bespokiynyy - Baltic Fleet (Limited talk of bringing it back with I imagine, minor overhaul to extend life, not deep modernization)
    Bezboyaznennyy - Pacific Fleet (Reserve, no updates on decomission or plans to reintroduce it)

    Based on the fact they certainly don't appear to be investing in them this late in the game my guess is indeed they'll be simply be maintained as placeholders to fill the ranks until a sufficient number of Gorshkovs and others (Grigorovichs etc) can relieve them somewhat..
    avatar
    KomissarBojanchev

    Posts : 1445
    Points : 1606
    Join date : 2012-08-05
    Age : 20
    Location : Varna, Bulgaria

    Re: Questions Thread: Russian Navy

    Post  KomissarBojanchev on Sat Aug 05, 2017 8:52 am

    DasVivo wrote:
    franco wrote:There are plans or talks to do a upgrade and life extension of some / all of the Udaloy's but have heard nothing in regards to the Sovremmeny. By the way I believe only 3 of them are still active (North, Baltic and Pacific). Would not be surprised if the Gorshkovs actually replace them.

    Last I looked it appeared that:
    Bystryy - Pacific Fleet
    Nastoychivyy - Baltic Fleet
    Admiral Ushakov - Northern Fleet

    Burnyy - Pacific Fleet (Currently being overhauled, not a deep modernization)
    Bespokiynyy - Baltic Fleet (Limited talk of bringing it back with I imagine, minor overhaul to extend life, not deep modernization)
    Bezboyaznennyy - Pacific Fleet (Reserve, no updates on decomission or plans to reintroduce it)

    Based on the fact they certainly don't appear to be investing in them this late in the game my guess is indeed they'll be simply be maintained as placeholders to fill the ranks until a sufficient number of Gorshkovs and others (Grigorovichs etc) can relieve them somewhat..

    But there will never be enough gorshkovs to replace them before 2030 and the grigoroviches are much weaker than them. The Grigoroviches are there to replace the neustrashimy and burevestniks, not full blown destroyers.
    avatar
    Kimppis

    Posts : 506
    Points : 506
    Join date : 2014-12-23

    Re: Questions Thread: Russian Navy

    Post  Kimppis on Sat Aug 05, 2017 1:51 pm

    Why? There will be atleast 8 Gorshkovs by 2030 (maybe more, including the larger variant), and probably 1 or 2 Liders aswell.
    avatar
    Isos

    Posts : 2328
    Points : 2322
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: Questions Thread: Russian Navy

    Post  Isos on Sat Aug 05, 2017 3:55 pm


    But there will never be enough gorshkovs to replace them before 2030 and the grigoroviches are much weaker than them. The Grigoroviches are there to replace the neustrashimy and burevestniks, not full blown destroyers.

    In terms of capabilities grigorovivitch are better than a ship that is 30 years old. The only point where it is not is th range. For the price of 1 Sov you have 3 grigorovitchs. Missile are by far better because they are newer, it is stealth and has UKSK for multi role missions.

    ali.a.r

    Posts : 110
    Points : 113
    Join date : 2011-11-04

    Re: Questions Thread: Russian Navy

    Post  ali.a.r on Mon Aug 07, 2017 10:08 am

    What is the watch system onboard Russian Navy ships?
    avatar
    KomissarBojanchev

    Posts : 1445
    Points : 1606
    Join date : 2012-08-05
    Age : 20
    Location : Varna, Bulgaria

    Are ship launched Anti-Sub missiles near useless?

    Post  KomissarBojanchev on Fri Nov 17, 2017 11:27 pm

    Are ship launched Anti-Sub missiles near useless?

    They seem to have an insufficient range to destroy detected subs and there's no enough ships equipped with them to scour enough sea area. Also most subs have torpedos with a larger range than anti-sub missiles. Even Russia's 650mm torp has longer range(~100km) than the klub antisub missile(~40km). Also, most US subs can simply lob 100s of harpoons far beyond the range of them. Not even the rastrub has enough range. The only way for ships to reliably hunt down subs before they can unload their weapons seems to be by helicopter. Therefore, the existence of dedicated anti-sub ships like the udaloy was unjustified since helicopters launched from conventional warships are far more effective.
    avatar
    Isos

    Posts : 2328
    Points : 2322
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: Questions Thread: Russian Navy

    Post  Isos on Sat Nov 18, 2017 5:19 am

    KomissarBojanchev wrote:They seem to have an insufficient range to destroy detected subs and there's no enough ships equipped with them to scour enough sea area. Also most subs have torpedos with a larger range than anti-sub missiles. Even Russia's 650mm torp has longer range(~100km) than the klub antisub missile(~40km). Also, most US subs can simply lob 100s of harpoons far beyond the range of them. Not even the rastrub has enough range. The only way for ships to reliably hunt down subs before they can unload their weapons seems to be by helicopter. Therefore, the existence of dedicated anti-sub ships like the udaloy was unjustified since helicopters launched from conventional warships are far more effective.

    It is still better than torpedos because the missile will fall just near the target and the little torpedo will have to make a run of some seconds to reach the sub. The engagement will last 2 or 3 minutes while firing a torpedo at 100 km will take 1h to reach the target so the target will have 1 hours to take evasive actions and torpedos are noisy so detecting them is easy for trained crew.

    Its is also faster than helicopters.

    Just like missiles, torpedos are not lunched at max range because they will have to manoeuvre to hit the target because the target will change its way when it detect the lunch.

    I think they gave a 40 km to the kalibr because it is the max detection range against subs for a ship. If they want to engage further they have helicopters.

    Azi

    Posts : 212
    Points : 208
    Join date : 2016-04-05

    Re: Questions Thread: Russian Navy

    Post  Azi on Mon Nov 20, 2017 10:23 pm

    KomissarBojanchev wrote:They seem to have an insufficient range to destroy detected subs and there's no enough ships equipped with them to scour enough sea area. Also most subs have torpedos with a larger range than anti-sub missiles. Even Russia's 650mm torp has longer range(~100km) than the klub antisub missile(~40km). Also, most US subs can simply lob 100s of harpoons far beyond the range of them. Not even the rastrub has enough range. The only way for ships to reliably hunt down subs before they can unload their weapons seems to be by helicopter. Therefore, the existence of dedicated anti-sub ships like the udaloy was unjustified since helicopters launched from conventional warships are far more effective.
    Subs can't attack that easy! They must be in the right position and correct tactic is needed. After a attack their position is revealed and subs are not that fast. Main problem is...subs can't defend really against air threats and small fast ships. So the sub becomes the prey.

    Surface ships have better sensors to scan a wide area, subs are limited to data input or their own sensors. Subs still are great combatants, with special role..nuclear triad, sneak behind enemy lines and attack convoys, surprise against a unwary opponent etc.

    And yes that's correct...best way to hunt subs are helicopter. That's why most bigger ships have a helipad.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 18397
    Points : 18955
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Questions Thread: Russian Navy

    Post  GarryB on Tue Nov 21, 2017 3:11 am

    With Klub the first a sub will know it is under attack is when a torpedo splashes into the water near the sub and starts scanning for it.

    For that sub to attack that ship means firing a torpedo which will more than likely be detected during the time it will take to get to the target...

    Longer range ballistic anti sub missiles don't exist because detecting enemy subs at longer range is just so unlikely unless they start actively pinging or launch weapons...

    At mach 2.5 an anti sub missile is actually rather fast... and silent to those underwater...

    Peŕrier

    Posts : 288
    Points : 288
    Join date : 2017-10-15

    Re: Questions Thread: Russian Navy

    Post  Peŕrier on Tue Nov 21, 2017 9:21 pm

    In addition to the former post from GarryB, once a sub has launched one or more torpedoes against a target, an ASW missile is the best way to engage the sub promptly, while decoys and ASW mortars like the RBU-6000 and rbu-12000 try to take out the torpedoes.

    In order to maximize the chance to break through the target's decoys noise, the sub should try to give the torpedoes updates from its own sensors through the tethering wire, and even a hard port or a fast dive to evade an incoming ASW torpedo could snap the wire forcing the torpedo to rely on its own sensors only, in turn easing countermeasures' job..

    Obviously, a tethered ASW torpedo will always have an higher KP because guided/assisted by the better sensors of the launching platform, but nothing would engage faster than a missile-borne ASW torpedo.

    The only better case would be of an incompetent Sub's Commander choosing to launch torpedoes when an ASW Heli happens to be just above his head.

    By the way, there is no SSN able to launch dozen of harpoon at a time.

    Those subs would be VLS equipped SSGNs, whose mission is not to engage a surface target unless for self-defense or if such target is of strategic value with no SSNs at hand.

    writertlynn`

    Posts : 4
    Points : 8
    Join date : 2018-03-26

    How Russian Ships are organized and operate

    Post  writertlynn` on Mon Mar 26, 2018 4:10 am

    Everyone

    I'm looking for any information I can find about how Russian ships are organized and operate. I've been looking into how the Russian Navy handle damage control and weapons firing/tracking aboard ship. I'm interested on how they do it and who does it. All I have been able to find so far has only talked about Russian strategic tactics and that is not what I am looking for.

    I would much appreciate any sources anyone can give me.

    Thanks.

    T
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 18397
    Points : 18955
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Questions Thread: Russian Navy

    Post  GarryB on Mon Mar 26, 2018 9:42 am

    It is a forum rule that your first post should be an introduction in the intro and rules section.

    Too late for you now, but please take the time to create a new thread in the introductions and rules section to introduce yourself... you might also want to take the time to skim through the rules and perhaps the intros of some of the members so you know who you are talking to.

    writertlynn`

    Posts : 4
    Points : 8
    Join date : 2018-03-26

    Sorry

    Post  writertlynn` on Tue Mar 27, 2018 2:03 am

    Garry - thanks - sorry. I had every intention of posting on the forum but had to step away from my computer and never got back to it.

    I have already read the rules and posted in the introduction area.

    T

    writertlynn`

    Posts : 4
    Points : 8
    Join date : 2018-03-26

    An example of what I am looking for.

    Post  writertlynn` on Sat Mar 31, 2018 2:18 am

    Here is an example of what I am looking for.

    Damage control organization.

    The US Navy ships are organized with damage control responsibilities set up with Damage Controlmen overall responsible for damage control and others assisting the damage controlmen as secondary responsibilities.

    Damage control is broken down into damage control parties designated 1,3,5,etc. who has specific responsibilities. These damage control parties are supervised by damage control men (with officers involved) but manned by other crew. These parties are responsible for primary damage control with other people being pulled from the ranks as people are hurt/killed, become tired, damage becomes too much for the primary damage control teams to handle,etc.

    The entire ship's damage control systems is run by an officer whose only job is damage control - the DCA (damage control assistant). He is the assistant to the Chief Engineer and his entire job is to be in complete control of everything aboard ship related to damage control. The ship has a space specifically for the control of damage control (Damage Control Central) and the DCA is there during all GQ's.

    In the case of extreme emergency, anyone not directly involved with either fighting the ship or moving the ship would be involved with damage control.

    The US Navy obviously trains damage controlmen the most in damage control with the damage control parties getting a bit less, and then general crew a bit less than that. But all hands are trained in at least minimal damage control activities as collateral duties along-side of their regular duties.

    The also have DC Maintenance men whose other collateral job includes keeping the ship's damage control equipment in good shape. These people may or may not be on damage control parties - they simply keep the equipment in their respective departments in good shape.

    So I am wondering if the Russian Navy or the Soviet Navy organized their damage control that way as well? How is it different. I just read the conscripted sailors are being removed from Russian Navy ships so how has that changed the way the ships are run?

    Thanks to anyone who can assist me.

    T
    avatar
    franco

    Posts : 3029
    Points : 3061
    Join date : 2010-08-18

    Re: Questions Thread: Russian Navy

    Post  franco on Sat Mar 31, 2018 10:21 am

    I have not seen a Russian poster say he served on ships. There is one poster who served in the navy but he did so land based. If you look in the video section there have been several in the past year showing training exercises in damage control.

    hoom

    Posts : 1199
    Points : 1189
    Join date : 2016-05-06

    Re: Questions Thread: Russian Navy

    Post  hoom on Mon Apr 02, 2018 9:22 am

    The RT documentary series The Baltic Fleet may be of some use? ep1 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XhCGtc4kWDQ
    Has a bunch of footage of them doing stuff onboard.
    I seem to recall some commentary that its a very staged thing & a bunch of it seems really odd so take with a handful of salt.

    Several of the Military Acceptance episodes include footage of damage control exercises too but I'm not gonna go hunting through them.
    avatar
    AlfaT8

    Posts : 1661
    Points : 1656
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    Gents, what's the possibility that The Lider will have Peresvet laser point defense system.

    Post  AlfaT8 on Fri Apr 06, 2018 12:55 am

    Gents, what's the possibility that The Lider will have Peresvet laser point defense system.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 18397
    Points : 18955
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Questions Thread: Russian Navy

    Post  GarryB on Fri Apr 06, 2018 1:10 am

    It would be rather sensible for larger Russian vessels to get laser missile defence systems.

    In fact the west claimed that the Frunze in the Kirov class actually had laser weapons in the mid 1980s when she entered service, but those claims were never substantiated AFAIK.

    Such a laser weapon would be a quick way of dealing with IIR guided anti ship missiles like NSM.

    avatar
    AlfaT8

    Posts : 1661
    Points : 1656
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    Re: Questions Thread: Russian Navy

    Post  AlfaT8 on Fri Apr 06, 2018 2:53 pm

    Ok, follow up question.

    How effective will the new U.S laser defense system be against past, current and soon to be deployed anti-ship missiles?

    avatar
    Isos

    Posts : 2328
    Points : 2322
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: Questions Thread: Russian Navy

    Post  Isos on Fri Apr 06, 2018 3:25 pm

    AlfaT8 wrote:Ok, follow up question.

    How effective will the new U.S laser defense system be against past, current and soon to be deployed anti-ship missiles?


    Totally useless. Antiship, specially those faced by US navy, missile are sea skiming and lunched in salvos.

    Laser weapons needs to find the target on radar then point the camera and then wait untill it burns the missile.

    With supersonic missile like oniks you have 30 sec to do all of this. Finding on radar then looking at it with the laser would recquire some seconds. Burning through oniks is not like burning this small drone. They are meant to resist mach 2 at very low altitude which means it resists high temperatures. So you would definitly need much more than what you see on the video with the drone. And if you have 4 or 5 coming at you ... you are dead. And they could just add a inside material that resist to laser to make it even harder to destroy it. If the weather is bad then its totally useless. To much disadvantages...

    Lasers are studied since very long. It's not new at all. There is a reason why no one used them during all this time. I would go with a 57 mm gun which would have same range (around10km) and would use a radar or a laser to track the target. The air burst ammunition like we see on WW2 era film when the rounds explode need the fighters would have a time fuze so that it would be send to  an interception point and explode at the target. Cheap and very reliable. Fore and forget. It could track maybe ten targets and shot a round at each of them in less than 2 sec for each target.

    If you really want want an energy weapons then you should go for something that burns tge electronics with micro waves or something like that.
    avatar
    SeigSoloyvov

    Posts : 1084
    Points : 1082
    Join date : 2016-04-08

    Re: Questions Thread: Russian Navy

    Post  SeigSoloyvov on Sun Apr 08, 2018 12:56 pm

    AlfaT8 wrote:Ok, follow up question.

    How effective will the new U.S laser defense system be against past, current and soon to be deployed anti-ship missiles?


    Impossible to say literally impossible, This is the kind of thing that will require it to happen in reality for it to be tested.

    Despite on anyone on this site says, there is no way to know for sure how it would go down.

    Sponsored content

    Re: Questions Thread: Russian Navy

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Sun Oct 21, 2018 1:45 pm