Project 21631: Buyan-M missile ship

PapaDragon wrote:
Yeah, the legendary diesel disaster

GarryB wrote:

The experiences in Syria show that only TORM 2 actually acts almost certain and every threat killt. This also has the better radar what I really decisive is for ships.  Better take a little more money in hand but have proper air defense and ship protection.

TOR are only on very big ships... ie Udaloy destroyers and Slava and Kirov class destroyers and the Kuznetsov CV... the radar directors are large and single purpose and therefore not really suitable for smaller vessels.

I have not read any information about any Pantsirs failing to shoot down threats... the only ones destroyed had no missiles on them... which suggests they were overwhelmed... which is something that can happen to any system. Equally the forces that were using them at the time used them singly or in pairs which makes them very vulnerable to swarm attack because there are no systems providing cover while missiles are reloaded.

The missiles on the naval version are automatically reloaded rather quickly and the two 6 barrel gatling gun mounts are also rather more formidable than the twin barrel 2A38M cannon used on the land based system.

The radar coverage and situational awareness of even a small ship will be much better than for any ground based individual SAM vehicle.

Is your horizon so small? It's all about threats like Delia, Spike, Harpon, C-802, etc. and not just about "Turkish drones". This also includes RQ-170 and other. Better radar, better rockets, better protection for the ship.

Pantsir could engage any of those systems and in a flat open ocean would see threats at much greater range too.

Both have engine production problems

But those production problems have not led to them cancelling anything, so logically those engine problems are being sorted out and solved... which sounds like an enormous waste of effort if you are just going to make a few more and then stop...

Mig-31BM2 Super Irbis-E wrote:

GarryB wrote:

The experiences in Syria show that only TORM 2 actually acts almost certain and every threat killt. This also has the better radar what I really decisive is for ships.  Better take a little more money in hand but have proper air defense and ship protection.

TOR are only on very big ships... ie Udaloy destroyers and Slava and Kirov class destroyers and the Kuznetsov CV... the radar directors are large and single purpose and therefore not really suitable for smaller vessels.

I have not read any information about any Pantsirs failing to shoot down threats... the only ones destroyed had no missiles on them... which suggests they were overwhelmed... which is something that can happen to any system. Equally the forces that were using them at the time used them singly or in pairs which makes them very vulnerable to swarm attack because there are no systems providing cover while missiles are reloaded.

The missiles on the naval version are automatically reloaded rather quickly and the two 6 barrel gatling gun mounts are also rather more formidable than the twin barrel 2A38M cannon used on the land based system.

The radar coverage and situational awareness of even a small ship will be much better than for any ground based individual SAM vehicle.

Is your horizon so small? It's all about threats like Delia, Spike, Harpon, C-802, etc. and not just about "Turkish drones". This also includes RQ-170 and other. Better radar, better rockets, better protection for the ship.

Pantsir could engage any of those systems and in a flat open ocean would see threats at much greater range too.

Both have engine production problems

But those production problems have not led to them cancelling anything, so logically those engine problems are being sorted out and solved... which sounds like an enormous waste of effort if you are just going to make a few more and then stop...

There are some reports from the Base of Latakia, in which PantsirM was not completely convinced. It looked different with Torm2.

Also, the BukM2E is preferred against sliding bombs or severe spacer weapons in Syria. Against serious anti-ship weapons, I therefore see TorM2 even better.

The system is not that big. An extension of the ship by about 5m takes the gate system behind the VLS. This also gives more space for larger drives for more energy and speed.

The PantsirM is sure to upgrade. Such a ship in the third generation with TorM2 would be significantly better in my view with 2x8 missiles and the better radar plus AK630.

Lennox wrote:
On land, the Tor and Buk outperform the Pansir-S1 (they have different roles, tho) significantly and that's just a fact. The SM version, however, is much better than the S1, so we'll have to see. On sea, Tor and Pantsir have quite different tasks. There's no reason a ship cant have both. It's just that the Kinzhal VLS isn't really compact, and Tor-M2KM is doing tests. But I would take the Pantsir with its extra radar over the AK630 any day.

There must be a good reason why the Orlan cruisers were equipped with both, and that the deep modernisation of Nahkimov isn't changing the arrangement. I trust the Russian naval architects and weapons gurus more than amateur enthusiasts, no offense intended to the naysayers! Very Happy

Isos wrote: Long range like S-400 are useless against missiles flying very low against which detection range is around 50km. Could use it but it's better to have quad pack 9m96 instead of 48N6. What they are good at is keep the enemy air force far away to not let them come close to jamm your fire control radars or use smaller missiles in bigger number.

Not true, but systems can actually control up to 8 missiles at a time against four targets with the field of view of the tracking radars which are quite wide... with four to 8 vehicles in each battery it is perfectly plausible to have each of the vehicles positioned to provide 360 degree coverage with their tracking radars... and both systems can optically engage targets too.

ALAMO wrote:... and imagine that those little fellas can just disappear in a waste inland river net of Russia, still being capable to strike targets in half of Europe/ME.
Hell, they cover the whole UK sitting in the middle of a lake next to Peter

ALAMO wrote:
Sure, you can shoot a Calibre from a lorry. A truck, a container, whatever.
But having two options is 100% better than having one, right?

ALAMO wrote:I still seriously consider, that you are not satisfied with the idea behind the whole river class navy they have made
Too small, not enough power and testosterone    
It is all about lessons from the past, when the Soviet, or Imperial navy, had a real problem obtaining a privileged position at functionally any theatre of operations, even if it was bigger in general numbers than the opposing forces. They used to be divided into different fleets, distanced and separated, easily overwhelmed by the opponent, if needed.
Plus they lacked the spirit de corpse, but that is another story and a problem they need to sort out.
Now, they can concentrate dozens of additional starting platforms for universal missile systems any time they need, any place they want.
The modern Russian Navy can relocate dozens of hulks from the Baltic, Barents, Caspian, Azov, and Middeterenian easily.
If determined enough, they can push them along the NSR, from the Western theatre to the Pacific one, in just the same time USN would need to regroup the strike force from Atlantic to Pacific, and park them at any place, hidden by the Kuril archipelago protective chain.  
Covered with own shores, defense systems, and supplied.
We don't see it as an obvious thing, because till now, they have never conducted a maneuver, when let's say 20 ships carrying 8 Calibrs each, transfer from the Azov/Caspia/Med basin north, showing up themselves from nowhere, in the Baltic. Or floating out of a river just next to Murmansk, saying friendly "hello" to Norway, Iceland and the whole GIUK gap.
Those ships would be a 20kt displacement in total, handling 160 cruise missiles, or ASM, impossible to find&track, with force distribution requiring enormous assets placed to sort it out.  The assets that neither Norway nor UK has.
And we don't see it as clear, as there are "only" 20+/- pieces keen to be used this way.
But just wait, they are starting up, and that will end with about dozens of ships very soon.
Sure, you can shoot a Calibre from a lorry. A truck, a container, whatever.
But having two options is 100% better than having one, right?