Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Questions Thread: Russian Navy

    Share
    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 1502
    Points : 1542
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Questions Thread: Russian Navy

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Sun Mar 20, 2016 5:10 pm

    About subs but not their armament: Does anybody any info about gym equipment on Russian subs? specially on nuclear subs...steel weights might cause lots of noise...no weights ? no good for couple of months outside port...body weight fixed gym? i.e. n o moving parts kind of turnik (ghetto workout in US)?
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 4803
    Points : 4909
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Questions Thread: Russian Navy

    Post  PapaDragon on Sun Mar 20, 2016 7:31 pm

    GunshipDemocracy wrote:About subs but not their armament: Does anybody any info about gym equipment on Russian subs? specially on nuclear subs...steel weights might cause lots of noise...no weights ? no good for couple of months outside port...body weight fixed gym? i.e. n o moving parts kind of turnik (ghetto workout in US)?

    I am pretty sure they solved that one long ago...
    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 1502
    Points : 1542
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Questions Thread: Russian Navy

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Sun Mar 20, 2016 9:47 pm

    PapaDragon wrote:
    GunshipDemocracy wrote:About subs but not their armament: Does anybody any info about gym equipment on Russian subs? specially on nuclear subs...steel weights might cause lots of noise...no weights ? no good for couple of months outside port...body weight fixed gym? i.e. n o moving parts kind of turnik (ghetto workout in US)?

    I am pretty sure they solved that one long ago...

    Actually my question about how and not if Smile
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 4803
    Points : 4909
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Questions Thread: Russian Navy

    Post  PapaDragon on Sun Mar 20, 2016 10:17 pm

    GunshipDemocracy wrote:
    PapaDragon wrote:
    GunshipDemocracy wrote:About subs but not their armament: Does anybody any info about gym equipment on Russian subs? specially on nuclear subs...steel weights might cause lots of noise...no weights ? no good for couple of months outside port...body weight fixed gym? i.e. n o moving parts kind of turnik (ghetto workout in US)?

    I am pretty sure they solved that one long ago...

    Actually my question about how and not if Smile

    Well if I had to guess I would say with ample use of rubber.... lol1

    But seriously, I don't know, we'll have to wait for Artyom or someone else for that one.
    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 1502
    Points : 1542
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Questions Thread: Russian Navy

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Sun Mar 20, 2016 11:02 pm

    PapaDragon wrote:
    GunshipDemocracy wrote:
    PapaDragon wrote:
    GunshipDemocracy wrote:About subs but not their armament: Does anybody any info about gym equipment on Russian subs? specially on nuclear subs...steel weights might cause lots of noise...no weights ? no good for couple of months outside port...body weight fixed gym? i.e. n o moving parts kind of turnik (ghetto workout in US)?

    I am pretty sure they solved that one long ago...

    Actually my question about how and not if Smile

    Well if I had to guess I would say with ample use of rubber.... lol1

    But seriously, I don't know, we'll have to wait for Artyom or someone else for that one.

    Guess so...nevertheless leisure and gym is becoming increasingly important the longe mission lasts...unless you are US sailor from Hollywood movie Very Happy
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16172
    Points : 16803
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    About subs but not their armament:

    Post  GarryB on Mon Mar 21, 2016 8:43 am

    Not really important what it is made of... 5kgs of sand in a hard plastic shell will make noise if it is thrown across the room and bangs into a wall just like a 5kgs steel weight in a plastic shell.

    The main issue is securing the weights and bars when not in use.


    _________________
    “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

    nastle77

    Posts : 189
    Points : 243
    Join date : 2015-07-25

    Questions Thread: Russian Navy

    Post  nastle77 on Wed Apr 20, 2016 5:42 am

    Was there any plan to use the ICBM in the ASUW or ASW role during the cold war era ?
    avatar
    Isos

    Posts : 727
    Points : 731
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: Questions Thread: Russian Navy

    Post  Isos on Sat Jul 02, 2016 10:05 pm

    Is Russian navy operating midget subs like yugo class or smaller ? Do they have projects of that type ?
    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 133
    Points : 135
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Questions Thread: Russian Navy

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Mon Aug 15, 2016 10:14 pm

    I wonder, can a MiG-25/31 safely take off the Adm. Kuznetsov and/or new Storm project carrier, with/without catapults? In other words, is the flight deck long enough & are the engines powerful enough? I know they won't be navalized, but those B-25s in the Dolittle raid weren't either!


    Last edited by Tsavo Lion on Mon Aug 15, 2016 10:44 pm; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : expand questions)
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16172
    Points : 16803
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    can a MiG-25/31 safely take off the Adm. Kuznetsov

    Post  GarryB on Tue Aug 16, 2016 11:41 am

    Not the MiG-25 or MiG-31... they are simply too heavy to accelerate to flight speed over such a short distance.

    Both aircraft are like trucks... they can get up to high speed over a long period of acceleration, but they are not sports cars.

    I did always think the MiG-23 would be a good carrier based aircraft... it had excellent acceleration and fitted with an AL-41 it would have impressive takeoff performance... but you would be better off with a PAK FA or MiG-35/Su-35.


    _________________
    “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
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 133
    Points : 135
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Questions Thread: Russian Navy

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Wed Aug 17, 2016 11:03 pm

    The MiG-23K was a proposed navalized version based on the MiG-23ML. A modified MiG-27 was tried on Nitka complex.  
     



    How about rocket assisted carrier takeoff for MiG-25 or MiG-31?
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16172
    Points : 16803
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Questions Thread: Russian Navy

    Post  GarryB on Thu Aug 18, 2016 12:43 pm

    Even just the cost in rockets would make it a bad idea... but the danger of rockets on the flight deck, and the fact that fully loaded these aircraft are very very heavy and even with a catapult would be marginal in terms of flight speed... meaning any problems on takeoff or landing and you lose a very big very heavy very expensive aircraft.

    The F-111 was originally going to be a carrier aircraft but was also deemed to be too heavy and it had the advantage of a big straight wing on takeoff (swing wing of course).

    The radar and big missiles developed for the F-111 for use on carriers as a big interceptor were later adapted to the F-14...

    It would make more sense to adapt the PAK FA to the carrier role than to make the MiGs heavier by strengthening them for carrier operations...

    The MiG-23 probably only lacked payload options as it pretty much was limited to two wing mounted BVR missiles in the form of R-24s and two underbody mounted twin launchers for R-60s... so two R-24s and four R-60s, with good flight range and speed.

    The fact is that the MiG-29 can do that better already.

    Was there any plan to use the ICBM in the ASUW or ASW role during the cold war era ?

    Not as far as I know. The problem would be targeting the ICBM to the target location as there was no direct communication between the Navy and Strategic Missile forces.

    The navy already had plenty of tactical nuclear weapons so the extra range of an ICBM would be overkill.

    If they did they would more likely use SLBMs rather than ICBMs, but I suspect enemy land targets would be a higher priority.


    _________________
    “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
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 133
    Points : 135
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Questions Thread: Russian Navy

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Thu Aug 18, 2016 8:38 pm

    ..fully loaded these aircraft are very very heavy and even with a catapult would be marginal in terms of flight speed...
    I meant the occasional recon/strike mission by non-navalized, not fully fueled & armed MiG-25/31. They could get their fuel tanks topped off in the air and recover on land!
    From airforce-technology.com:
    The MiG-25R is a tactical reconnaissance aircraft. The MiG-25RB is a variant for bombing area and large targets. The aircraft is fitted with a reconnaissance station, aerial camera, topographic aerial camera, the Peteng sighting and navigation system to bomb programmed targets, and electronic countermeasures (ECM) equipment, which includes active jamming and electronic reconnaissance systems.
    The MiG-25BM aircraft has the capability to launch guided missiles against ground targets, and to destroy area targets, targets with known co-ordinates, and enemy radars. The airborne anti-radar Kh-58 (Nato codename AS-11 Kilter) missiles are capable of destroying enemy radars, such as the targeting radars of Hawk-type air defence missile systems, at stand-off ranges. The launch range of the Kh-58 is from 40-300km.

    nastle77

    Posts : 189
    Points : 243
    Join date : 2015-07-25

    Re: Questions Thread: Russian Navy

    Post  nastle77 on Fri Aug 19, 2016 4:06 am

    GarryB wrote:Even just the cost in rockets would make it a bad idea... but the danger of rockets on the flight deck, and the fact that fully loaded these aircraft are very very heavy and even with a catapult would be marginal in terms of flight speed... meaning any problems on takeoff or landing and you lose a very big very heavy very expensive aircraft.

    The F-111 was originally going to be a carrier aircraft but was also deemed to be too heavy and it had the advantage of a big straight wing on takeoff (swing wing of course).

    The radar and big missiles developed for the F-111 for use on carriers as a big interceptor were later adapted to the F-14...

    It would make more sense to adapt the PAK FA to the carrier role than to make the MiGs heavier by strengthening them for carrier operations...

    The MiG-23 probably only lacked payload options as it pretty much was limited to two wing mounted BVR missiles in the form of R-24s and two underbody mounted twin launchers for R-60s... so two R-24s and four R-60s, with good flight range and speed.

    The fact is that the MiG-29 can do that better already.

    Was there any plan to use the ICBM in the ASUW or ASW role during the cold war era ?

    Not as far as I know. The problem would be targeting the ICBM to the target location as there was no direct communication between the Navy and Strategic Missile forces.

    The navy already had plenty of tactical nuclear weapons so the extra range of an ICBM would be overkill.

    If they did they would more likely use SLBMs rather than ICBMs, but I suspect enemy land targets would be a higher priority.

    Thanks
    SLBM could they be targeted towards warships ? And what about the AS 15 cruise missiles carried by Bear H. Were they ever considered as anti ship weapons ?
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16172
    Points : 16803
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Questions Thread: Russian Navy

    Post  GarryB on Fri Aug 19, 2016 12:45 pm

    I meant the occasional recon/strike mission by non-navalized, not fully fueled & armed MiG-25/31. They could get their fuel tanks topped off in the air and recover on land!

    Their problem is that they are aerodynamically optimised for high altitude and high speed flight so they have thin low profile wings that are very low drag but also low lift... optimised for high speed flight not low speed takeoffs and landings.

    The MiG-25RB is an awesome variant, but it is also very limited.

    They carry 1,500kg bombs adapted to very high speed flight with special fuses that can operate at high speed at high temperatures... but they are not precision weapons.

    New developments in satellite guided technology could revolutionise their performance, but at the end of the day the Russian navy is on the verge of introducing hypersonic scramjet powered anti ship missiles... it wont be a huge step to make them land attack capable, so instead of a Mach 3 bomber taking off from a carrier to deliver a bomb at high speed they could have a stealthy PAK FA based aircraft with Zircon carried that hits the target at mach 7 or 8... and not have to fly over the target area.

    The latest version of the Kh-58 will also be carried internally on the PAK FA... it is smaller and lighter and has folding fins and has a max range from a slower aircraft like the PAK FA of 245km from a high altitude launch... it has a range of 75km with a launch from 200m altitude.


    SLBM could they be targeted towards warships ?

    I suppose it could be possible, but I think it unlikely. Most SLBMs would have fixed land based targets programmed in to their guidance systems and I doubt changing them would be common or likely.

    Most SLBMs would have coordinates they target, so if given time and the correct information they might be used against enemy surface vessels but in practical terms it is much easier and cheaper and simpler to use one of their large anti ship missiles... many of which carried nuclear warheads for that very purpose... missiles like Granit and Vulkan etc etc.

    And what about the AS 15 cruise missiles carried by Bear H. Were they ever considered as anti ship weapons ?

    They were guided to fixed coordinates... not moving targets. Their accuracy was low so a nuclear warhead and an area target was a necessity.

    Today with Calibr and Klub and terminal guidance then anti ship and land attack with conventional warheads becomes practical because the accuracy is good enough for direct hits.


    _________________
    “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
    GarryB

    Posts : 16172
    Points : 16803
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Is Russian navy operating midget subs like yugo class or smaller ? Do they have projects of that type ?

    Post  GarryB on Sat Sep 03, 2016 11:36 am

    Is Russian navy operating midget subs like yugo class or smaller ? Do they have projects of that type ?

    Piranha, and Losharak are two small subs they operate... there are a few more including rescue subs.


    _________________
    “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
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 4803
    Points : 4909
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Questions Thread: Russian Navy

    Post  PapaDragon on Fri Apr 21, 2017 9:41 pm


    Guys I have a question about Project 22460 Coast Guard ships:

    They have option for installation of 4 x Kh-35 missiles even though they are not currently installed.

    Where exactly on the ship would they go if they were to be installed?

    avatar
    Benya

    Posts : 422
    Points : 426
    Join date : 2016-06-05
    Location : Budapest, Hungary

    Guys I have a question about Project 22460 Coast Guard ships:

    Post  Benya on Fri Apr 21, 2017 10:39 pm

    PapaDragon wrote:
    Guys I have a question about Project 22460 Coast Guard ships:

    They have option for installation of 4 x Kh-35 missiles even though they are not currently installed.

    Where exactly on the ship would they go if they were to be installed?


    I think that they could be mounted in front of or behind that gun.
    avatar
    AlfaT8

    Posts : 1314
    Points : 1321
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    Re: Questions Thread: Russian Navy

    Post  AlfaT8 on Mon May 22, 2017 11:20 pm

    What is the status on Project 11541 korsar
    I haven't heard anything about it, is it vapor-ware??

    http://www.russiadefence.net/t2591p60-2013-naval-show-st-petersburg
    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10060
    Points : 10550
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Questions Thread: Russian Navy

    Post  George1 on Mon May 22, 2017 11:33 pm

    AlfaT8 wrote:What is the status on Project 11541 korsar
    I haven't heard anything about it, is it vapor-ware??

    http://www.russiadefence.net/t2591p60-2013-naval-show-st-petersburg

    Ιt is the export version of Neustrashimy Class (Project 11540 Yastreb)



    _________________
    "There's no smoke without fire.", Georgy Zhukov

    avatar
    AlfaT8

    Posts : 1314
    Points : 1321
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    Re: Questions Thread: Russian Navy

    Post  AlfaT8 on Tue May 23, 2017 12:00 am

    George1 wrote:
    AlfaT8 wrote:What is the status on Project 11541 korsar
    I haven't heard anything about it, is it vapor-ware??

    http://www.russiadefence.net/t2591p60-2013-naval-show-st-petersburg

    Ιt is the export version of Neustrashimy Class (Project 11540 Yastreb)


    Hell of an export variant if these models are accurate.
    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10060
    Points : 10550
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Questions Thread: Russian Navy

    Post  George1 on Tue May 23, 2017 12:01 am

    AlfaT8 wrote:
    George1 wrote:
    AlfaT8 wrote:What is the status on Project 11541 korsar
    I haven't heard anything about it, is it vapor-ware??

    http://www.russiadefence.net/t2591p60-2013-naval-show-st-petersburg

    Ιt is the export version of Neustrashimy Class (Project 11540 Yastreb)


    Hell of an export variant if these models are accurate.

    Here are the specifications in the Rosoboronexport catalog

    http://roe.ru/eng/catalog/naval-systems/surface-ships-ships-and-boats/korsar/


    _________________
    "There's no smoke without fire.", Georgy Zhukov

    avatar
    AlfaT8

    Posts : 1314
    Points : 1321
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    Re: Questions Thread: Russian Navy

    Post  AlfaT8 on Tue May 23, 2017 2:19 am

    George1 wrote:Here are the specifications in the Rosoboronexport catalog

    http://roe.ru/eng/catalog/naval-systems/surface-ships-ships-and-boats/korsar/

    Thx man, i noticed something odd in this catalog, according to the catalog the Grigorovich doesn't have Sigma it uses something called Trebovanie-M, while the Gepard 3.9 does use Sigma??

    Is this the same with the domestic variant of the Grigorovich?
    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10060
    Points : 10550
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Questions Thread: Russian Navy

    Post  George1 on Tue May 23, 2017 2:48 am

    AlfaT8 wrote:
    George1 wrote:Here are the specifications in the Rosoboronexport catalog

    http://roe.ru/eng/catalog/naval-systems/surface-ships-ships-and-boats/korsar/

    Thx man, i noticed something odd in this catalog, according to the catalog the Grigorovich doesn't have Sigma it uses something called Trebovanie-M, while the Gepard 3.9 does use Sigma??

    Is this the same with the domestic variant of the Grigorovich?

    Yes the same type of ship. Concerning the battle management system i have noticed in some cases that is offered either Trebovanie-M or Sigma, for example for 22356 export project:
    http://www.oaoosk.ru/en/products/project-22356


    _________________
    "There's no smoke without fire.", Georgy Zhukov

    avatar
    AlfaT8

    Posts : 1314
    Points : 1321
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    Re: Questions Thread: Russian Navy

    Post  AlfaT8 on Tue May 23, 2017 3:17 am

    George1 wrote:
    AlfaT8 wrote:
    George1 wrote:Here are the specifications in the Rosoboronexport catalog

    http://roe.ru/eng/catalog/naval-systems/surface-ships-ships-and-boats/korsar/

    Thx man, i noticed something odd in this catalog, according to the catalog the Grigorovich doesn't have Sigma it uses something called Trebovanie-M, while the Gepard 3.9 does use Sigma??

    Is this the same with the domestic variant of the Grigorovich?

    Yes the same type of ship. Concerning the battle management system i have noticed in some cases that is offered either Trebovanie-M or Sigma, for example for 22356 export project:
    http://www.oaoosk.ru/en/products/project-22356

    How strange.
    Its optional, i guess.

    Sponsored content

    Re: Questions Thread: Russian Navy

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Sat Jul 22, 2017 2:32 pm