Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Udaloy and Sovremennyy destroyers

    Share

    T-47

    Posts : 219
    Points : 219
    Join date : 2017-07-17
    Location : Planet Earth

    Re: Udaloy and Sovremennyy destroyers

    Post  T-47 on Mon Aug 21, 2017 5:25 pm

    Silex removed or not? Two of you telling different things!
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 7122
    Points : 7216
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Udaloy and Sovremennyy destroyers

    Post  PapaDragon on Mon Aug 21, 2017 6:54 pm

    T-47 wrote:Silex removed or not? Two of you telling different things!

    Silex is already gone:

    https://i.servimg.com/u/f11/19/75/77/05/dhl-xu10.jpg
    avatar
    SeigSoloyvov

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

    Re: Udaloy and Sovremennyy destroyers

    Post  SeigSoloyvov on Mon Aug 21, 2017 11:34 pm

    Regardless we will see what the changes are when the first one gets modernized should have been done by now but hey.

    T-47

    Posts : 219
    Points : 219
    Join date : 2017-07-17
    Location : Planet Earth

    Re: Udaloy and Sovremennyy destroyers

    Post  T-47 on Tue Aug 22, 2017 2:19 pm

    PapaDragon wrote:
    Silex is already gone:

    https://i.servimg.com/u/f11/19/75/77/05/dhl-xu10.jpg

    And what is that red arrow pointing? Also are we expecting inclined UKSK in place of Silex? Or Urans?

    miroslav

    Posts : 98
    Points : 100
    Join date : 2016-11-16
    Location : Land of Serbia

    Re: Udaloy and Sovremennyy destroyers

    Post  miroslav on Tue Aug 22, 2017 3:58 pm

    T-47 wrote:
    PapaDragon wrote:
    Silex is already gone:

    https://i.servimg.com/u/f11/19/75/77/05/dhl-xu10.jpg

    And what is that red arrow pointing? Also are we expecting inclined UKSK in place of Silex? Or Urans?

    No body knows for sure, we are all just guessing. Like i wrote in a previous post, it makes sense that the 2 UKSKs will go in the hole where the second main gun was, since that is the cheapest and fastest option, least amount of work needed.

    All else is just gueesing, if they have 2 UKSK than they don't really need the Silex any more, so it does make sense to put Uran launcher there, it's a ready made replacement. As far as the quantity, I think 2 on each side is reasonable, 3 on each side is not , to many explosives in one place an more importantly, what can they do with 24 subsonic missiles (6 quad launchers) that they can't with 16, remember that they will have Onix too, in some quantity.

    Uran system will, ultimately, be there for "self defense" but since it is a big ship they have room to put extra. If they wanted to have a true surface striker then they would put more UKSKs with Onix, right?

    As far as the angled UKSKs, who knows.
    avatar
    Isos

    Posts : 2331
    Points : 2325
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: Udaloy and Sovremennyy destroyers

    Post  Isos on Tue Aug 22, 2017 4:05 pm

    miroslav wrote:
    T-47 wrote:
    PapaDragon wrote:
    Silex is already gone:

    https://i.servimg.com/u/f11/19/75/77/05/dhl-xu10.jpg

    And what is that red arrow pointing? Also are we expecting inclined UKSK in place of Silex? Or Urans?

    No body knows for sure, we are all just guessing. Like i wrote in a previous post, it makes sense that the 2 UKSKs will go in the hole where the second main gun was, since that is the cheapest and fastest option, least amount of work needed.

    All else is just gueesing, if they have 2 UKSK than they don't really need the Silex any more, so it does make sense to put Uran launcher there. As far as the quantity, I think 2 on each side is reasonable, 3 on each side is not , to many explosives in one place an more importantly, what can they do with 24 subsonic missiles (6 quad launchers) that they can't with 16, remember that they will have Onix too, in some quantity.

    Uran system will, ultimately, be there for "self defense" but since it is a big ship they have room to put extra. If they wanted to have a true surface striker then they would put more UKSKs with Onix, right?

    Oniks is 9m long, UKSK is at least 10m. So they need lot of space for them. Gorshkov are design to accomodate them. Udaloys are big ships but if the internal structure doesn't permit to have a hole of 10m then the modernization will be much more difficult. You can't just delate rooms or kitchen like that.

    There is a class of speed boat of Indian navy with 4 set of Urans (very small boat). Udaloys can have easily 8 of them. They are very compact. But I ould definitly keep modernized Moskit missiles while putting some Urans at the rear.

    T-47

    Posts : 219
    Points : 219
    Join date : 2017-07-17
    Location : Planet Earth

    Re: Udaloy and Sovremennyy destroyers

    Post  T-47 on Tue Aug 22, 2017 6:05 pm

    Isos wrote:
    Oniks is 9m long, UKSK is at least 10m. So they need lot of space for them. Gorshkov are design to accomodate them. Udaloys are big ships but if the internal structure doesn't permit to have a hole of 10m then the modernization will be much more difficult. You can't just delate rooms or kitchen like that.

    Good point but I think they found a solution. They choose the upper deck gun! The gun itself is 5m deep. So with autoloading system with ammo racks I think 10m can be managed. Also newer equipment and electronics will free some space and crews. Or obviously they can't put UKSK there.

    There is a class of speed boat of Indian navy with 4 set of Urans (very small boat). Udaloys can have easily 8 of them. They are very compact.

    I think they are already having 16 Urans at rear facing two sides. Not sure about the Silex place. I think they can put 16 in each side so 32 Uran at front.

    But I ould definitly keep modernized Moskit missiles while putting some Urans at the rear.

    Udaloy I doesn't have Moskit, they have Malakhit. Udaloy II has Moskit.

    These are all our guess. So lets guess more Razz I think Onyx can be use in the place of Silex as well! They are similar in size. So 8 Onyx at angled launchers. 16 UKSK for whatever the mission requires, normally I'll put all 16 ASW Kalibr just because they are ASW destroyers. With 16 Urans in the ass for defense/close range attack.
    avatar
    Big_Gazza

    Posts : 1344
    Points : 1346
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Re: Udaloy and Sovremennyy destroyers

    Post  Big_Gazza on Wed Aug 23, 2017 3:06 am

    My ideal re-build for the Udaloy I:

    2x UKSK VLS replacing the forward No2 100m gun.  (*1)
    2x 6-round Oniks launchers replacing the Metel/Silex boxes.  (*2)
    4x 4-round Uran launchers fitted to both sides at aft
    Replace AK-630 with Duet AK-630M1-2

    (*1) To be loaded out with ASW variants.
    (*2) These would be Bastion-style launch tubes fitted to open racks similar to the 6-tube racks trialled on the Nakat. Metel missiles were 7.2m long and the launchers exhausted the rocket plume out the back of the box and required open space behind to dissipate the exhaust.  For the 8.9m Oniks (where exhaust is contained within the tube and directed forwards) the launch racks can be positioned further back and will therefore retain the approximate same overall footprint of the old launch box.

    The Udaloy biggest weakness has always been its lack of a mid-to-long range AA capability.  As effective as the Tor-based Kinzhal was, its range limited, and any major upgrade to more capable SAMs or radars would be prohibitively expensive (though hopefully there is a upgrade available for newer missiles and electronics that can retain the existing launchers and radars?).

    hoom

    Posts : 1201
    Points : 1191
    Join date : 2016-05-06

    Re: Udaloy and Sovremennyy destroyers

    Post  hoom on Wed Aug 23, 2017 6:09 am

    Certainly quite possible that they just do a 'quick' UKSK & Uran upgrade.
    To me if you're going to the effort you kinda might as well do a decent AA upgrade same time, giving decent multi-role abilities to the ship.
    But the more complex the upgrade, the more expensive & time consuming -> less time/money available for building new ships to replace.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 18409
    Points : 18967
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Udaloy and Sovremennyy destroyers

    Post  GarryB on Wed Aug 23, 2017 12:59 pm

    The beauty of the UKSK system is that you can choose a different load every time you load up... the choice does not need to be fixed in any way.

    Regarding Uran there are land attack versions of that missile with a range of about 250km, and as a self defence missile it would be a very good weapon for use against enemy ships.

    The Udaloy is primarily an anti sub ship so long range SAMs are not likely to be critical though Pantsir might be useful a Redut bin of 150km range and 60km range SAMS would be interesting...
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 7122
    Points : 7216
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Udaloy and Sovremennyy destroyers

    Post  PapaDragon on Wed Aug 23, 2017 2:10 pm

    GarryB wrote:The beauty of the UKSK system is that you can choose a different load every time you load up... the choice does not need to be fixed in any way.
    ................

    Not really...

    http://www.russiadefence.net/t6680p25-uksk-vls-system#202652
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 18409
    Points : 18967
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Udaloy and Sovremennyy destroyers

    Post  GarryB on Thu Aug 24, 2017 10:35 am

    The launchers themselves are universal...

    The ship they are fitted to and the control systems attached determine what missile can be used, but the updated new C4IR systems should allow all missile types to be carried when fitted as an upgrade.

    those missile tubes only carry three types of missile... land attack, anti ship, and anti sub... the Udaloy would have been primarily armed with the latter, but likely upgrades to the systems and sensors should allow the other types of missiles to be carried and used.
    avatar
    Isos

    Posts : 2331
    Points : 2325
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: Udaloy and Sovremennyy destroyers

    Post  Isos on Fri Aug 25, 2017 11:31 am

    Big_Gazza wrote:My ideal re-build for the Udaloy I:

    2x UKSK VLS replacing the forward No2 100m gun.  (*1)
    2x 6-round Oniks launchers replacing the Metel/Silex boxes.  (*2)
    4x 4-round Uran launchers fitted to both sides at aft
    Replace AK-630 with Duet AK-630M1-2

    (*1) To be loaded out with ASW variants.
    (*2) These would be Bastion-style launch tubes fitted to open racks similar to the 6-tube racks trialled on the Nakat. Metel missiles were 7.2m long and the launchers exhausted the rocket plume out the back of the box and required open space behind to dissipate the exhaust.  For the 8.9m Oniks (where exhaust is contained within the tube and directed forwards) the launch racks can be positioned further back and will therefore retain the approximate same overall footprint of the old launch box.

    The Udaloy biggest weakness has always been its lack of a mid-to-long range AA capability.  As effective as the Tor-based Kinzhal was, its range limited, and any major upgrade to more capable SAMs or radars would be prohibitively expensive (though hopefully there is a upgrade available for newer missiles and electronics that can retain the existing launchers and radars?).

    Or instead of UKSK put some redut ... Having oniks instead of Metel/Silex is enough and do not forget they have torpedo tubes so they don't need antisubmarine rockets and if needed they can make them suitable for Kalibr like Kilo class torpedo tubes that can lunch Kalibr. A salvo of 16 Uran will be a challenge to even Carrier task group and they have longer range than oniks in low altitude Attack.
    avatar
    Big_Gazza

    Posts : 1344
    Points : 1346
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Re: Udaloy and Sovremennyy destroyers

    Post  Big_Gazza on Fri Aug 25, 2017 12:14 pm

    Isos wrote:
    Big_Gazza wrote:My ideal re-build for the Udaloy I:

    2x UKSK VLS replacing the forward No2 100m gun.  (*1)
    2x 6-round Oniks launchers replacing the Metel/Silex boxes.  (*2)
    4x 4-round Uran launchers fitted to both sides at aft
    Replace AK-630 with Duet AK-630M1-2

    (*1) To be loaded out with ASW variants.
    (*2) These would be Bastion-style launch tubes fitted to open racks similar to the 6-tube racks trialled on the Nakat. Metel missiles were 7.2m long and the launchers exhausted the rocket plume out the back of the box and required open space behind to dissipate the exhaust.  For the 8.9m Oniks (where exhaust is contained within the tube and directed forwards) the launch racks can be positioned further back and will therefore retain the approximate same overall footprint of the old launch box.

    The Udaloy biggest weakness has always been its lack of a mid-to-long range AA capability.  As effective as the Tor-based Kinzhal was, its range limited, and any major upgrade to more capable SAMs or radars would be prohibitively expensive (though hopefully there is a upgrade available for newer missiles and electronics that can retain the existing launchers and radars?).

    Or instead of UKSK put some redut ... Having oniks instead of Metel/Silex is enough and do not forget they have torpedo tubes so they don't need antisubmarine rockets and if needed they can make them suitable for Kalibr like Kilo class torpedo tubes that can lunch Kalibr. A salvo of 16 Uran will be a challenge to even Carrier task group and they have longer range than oniks in low altitude Attack.

    To carry Redut they would need to upgrade the radars and fire control systems, and that will radically increase cost.  Also Oniks is not a replacement for Metel as without a long-range ASW weapon, the vessel cannot make use of her large sonar range, or use her helicopters to proper effect (ie using helo hydrophones to detect enemy subs at distance and targetting them with rapid-reaction rocket-assisted heavy torpedos).   Torpedo launchers are OK for close-in work, but don't replace Metel.

    Finally, Urans are not very effective against CBGs as their short(ish) range places the ship in a vulnerable position within range of carrier attack aircraft. Urans are best used in salvos against surface enemies operating with ittle air cover, up to destroyer size.

    Udaloys should be upgraded as potent ASW/Surface combatants and leave the mid-to-long range AA to escorts or land-based aviation, and this is consistent with their primary mission of protecting SSBN bastions from Yankistani SSNs.
    avatar
    Isos

    Posts : 2331
    Points : 2325
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: Udaloy and Sovremennyy destroyers

    Post  Isos on Fri Aug 25, 2017 12:57 pm

    To carry Redut they would need to upgrade the radars and fire control systems, and that will radically increase cost. Also Oniks is not a replacement for Metel as without a long-range ASW weapon, the vessel cannot make use of her large sonar range, or use her helicopters to proper effect (ie using helo hydrophones to detect enemy subs at distance and targetting them with rapid-reaction rocket-assisted heavy torpedos). Torpedo launchers are OK for close-in work, but don't replace Metel.

    Finally, Urans are not very effective against CBGs as their short(ish) range places the ship in a vulnerable position within range of carrier attack aircraft. Urans are best used in salvos against surface enemies operating with ittle air cover, up to destroyer size.

    Udaloys should be upgraded as potent ASW/Surface combatants and leave the mid-to-long range AA to escorts or land-based aviation, and this is consistent with their primary mission of protecting SSBN bastions from Yankistani SSNs.

    You are right for Redut but if you want anti air weapons you will need new radars. So there is no other solution than keeping Tor which is not bad at all and Udaloyswill probably be covered by Gorshkov air defence.

    I disagree on the other points. Torpedo tubes can carry Metel like on Udaloy II. So you will keep your ASW Rocket and as I said you probably can use Kalibr from them with little modification to the software as you already will use Kalibr computer/softwares/hardwares for UKSK.

    Uran can be very effective. Modern wars can start quickly and end very quickly. In the mediteranean actually US carrier are not more than 200km from Russian ships. 16 low flying missiles will at least make the available anti air missiles drop in big numbers ( remember the Houti Attack againt US cruiser they lunched at least 2 missiles oneach attacking missiles). I'm not they will hit. So it would make the Oniks penetration easier and more successfull. The main goal IMO of the upgrade is to make more multi-role. They need to give them other roles than just ASW.

    hoom

    Posts : 1201
    Points : 1191
    Join date : 2016-05-06

    Re: Udaloy and Sovremennyy destroyers

    Post  hoom on Fri Aug 25, 2017 1:05 pm

    To carry Redut they would need to upgrade the radars and fire control systems, and that will radically increase cost.
    Which is why I suggested Shtil-1: works with the existing Fregat radar & MR-90 is small enough to fit lots of places especially if the big Kinzhal directors are gone.
    Edit: plus is known to work, in production & desperately in need of more platforms to mount it IMO

    Torpedo tubes can carry Metel like on Udaloy II
    Speaking of the torp tubes, do they carry multiple reloads?
    avatar
    Big_Gazza

    Posts : 1344
    Points : 1346
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Re: Udaloy and Sovremennyy destroyers

    Post  Big_Gazza on Fri Aug 25, 2017 5:43 pm

    Isos wrote:Torpedo tubes can carry Metel like on Udaloy II.
    I think you mean RPK-2 Vyuga, not Metel. Metel/Silex can't be launched from a torpedo tube as its an over-under configuration, rocket booster on top, with a torpedo slung beneath.
    avatar
    Isos

    Posts : 2331
    Points : 2325
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: Udaloy and Sovremennyy destroyers

    Post  Isos on Sat Aug 26, 2017 1:45 pm

    Big_Gazza wrote:
    Isos wrote:Torpedo tubes can carry Metel like on Udaloy II.
    I think you mean RPK-2 Vyuga, not Metel.  Metel/Silex can't be launched from a torpedo tube as its an over-under configuration, rocket booster on top, with a torpedo slung beneath.

    Yeah my bad !!

    Which is why I suggested Shtil-1: works with the existing Fregat radar & MR-90 is small enough to fit lots of places especially if the big Kinzhal directors are gone.
    Edit: plus is known to work, in production & desperately in need of more platforms to mount it IMO

    To bad they don't have a more compact VLS system with more cells for the Shtil like 1 big with 36 cells instead of puting 2 of 12 cells ( Grigorovitch frigates).

    hoom

    Posts : 1201
    Points : 1191
    Join date : 2016-05-06

    Re: Udaloy and Sovremennyy destroyers

    Post  hoom on Sat Aug 26, 2017 8:40 pm

    Well there is a 36 cell version


    Its 3* 12 cell modules together, not really sure how it could be more compact than that though Suspect

    T-47

    Posts : 219
    Points : 219
    Join date : 2017-07-17
    Location : Planet Earth

    Re: Udaloy and Sovremennyy destroyers

    Post  T-47 on Sun Aug 27, 2017 12:48 pm

    They just added three 12 cell module. To make it more compact they need one 36 cell module.
    avatar
    Isos

    Posts : 2331
    Points : 2325
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: Udaloy and Sovremennyy destroyers

    Post  Isos on Sun Aug 27, 2017 1:15 pm

    @Hoom Do you have the dimensions of this one ? If it can fit on Grigorovitch why didn't they use this one ? Because on Grigorovitch there are two set that takes a lot of space while a big like this one could take the same space with greater amount of missiles.

    It could be a very good modernization for Sov by puting 2 of those VLS instead of the two single lunchers and maybe 2 more instead of the gun at the rear and new engines.

    And maybe create a small cruise missile that could fit in it.

    T-47

    Posts : 219
    Points : 219
    Join date : 2017-07-17
    Location : Planet Earth

    Re: Udaloy and Sovremennyy destroyers

    Post  T-47 on Sun Aug 27, 2017 2:00 pm

    Isos wrote:
    It could be a very good modernization for Sov by puting 2 of those VLS instead of the two single lunchers and maybe 2 more instead of the gun at the rear and new engines.

    Do they have plans for upgrading sovs as well? I thought its just Udaloys....
    avatar
    Isos

    Posts : 2331
    Points : 2325
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: Udaloy and Sovremennyy destroyers

    Post  Isos on Sun Aug 27, 2017 2:08 pm

    T-47 wrote:
    Isos wrote:
    It could be a very good modernization for Sov by puting 2 of those VLS instead of the two single lunchers and maybe 2 more instead of the gun at the rear and new engines.

    Do they have plans for upgrading sovs as well? I thought its just Udaloys....

    No they don't. China is modernizing its own Sovs with VLS system. Such a big ship could manage to have a lot of VLS if you remove one gun and the internal space of the single lunchers for Shtil.

    hoom

    Posts : 1201
    Points : 1191
    Join date : 2016-05-06

    Re: Udaloy and Sovremennyy destroyers

    Post  hoom on Sun Aug 27, 2017 4:11 pm

    To make it more compact they need one 36 cell module.
    Perhaps I'm missing something but the gap between the modules as shown is only slightly wider than the cell spacing within the module, would be nearly impossible to make it more compact.

    @Hoom Do you have the dimensions of this one ? If it can fit on Grigorovitch why didn't they use this one ? Because on Grigorovitch there are two set that takes a lot of space while a big like this one could take the same space with greater amount of missiles.
    I had been trying to find dimensions for that post but failed first couple of tries then decided I couldn't be assed dunno
    There has been talk on Balancer forums about why they put only 24 cells on Grigorovich vs the 36 shown on models (& I think Talwar has 36 for the arm launcher?), seems to be something weight related & I think probably due to the removal of the Kashtans aft making it bow heavy with 36.
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 7122
    Points : 7216
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Udaloy and Sovremennyy destroyers

    Post  PapaDragon on Fri Dec 22, 2017 2:58 am


    Destroyers Admiral Chebanenko and Marshal Shaposhnikov undergoing overhaul:





    https://sdelanounas.ru/blogs/101862/

    Sponsored content

    Re: Udaloy and Sovremennyy destroyers

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Mon Oct 22, 2018 8:55 am