Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Project 20836 Corvette/Frigate

    Share
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 5760
    Points : 5864
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    20386 3d CAD interior

    Post  PapaDragon on Mon Jul 03, 2017 3:07 pm

    hoom wrote:20385 has UKSK forward, Redut on the sides aft of the hangar.
    20386 has Redut forward, Uran in that slot in the middle, Kalibr via containers through the hatch aft.

    They said that second 20386 should be fitted with UKSK. There should be plenty of space to squeeze them in that middle slot where Uran currently is
    avatar
    Isos

    Posts : 971
    Points : 969
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: Project 20836 Corvette/Frigate

    Post  Isos on Mon Jul 03, 2017 4:59 pm

    PapaDragon wrote:
    hoom wrote:20385 has UKSK forward, Redut on the sides aft of the hangar.
    20386 has Redut forward, Uran in that slot in the middle, Kalibr via containers through the hatch aft.

    They said that second 20386 should be fitted with UKSK. There should be plenty of space to squeeze them in that middle slot where Uran currently is

    It can have it in a container under the deck. Uran is a cheap solution for anti shipping.
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 5760
    Points : 5864
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Project 20836 Corvette/Frigate

    Post  PapaDragon on Mon Jul 03, 2017 5:55 pm

    Isos wrote:
    PapaDragon wrote:
    hoom wrote:20385 has UKSK forward, Redut on the sides aft of the hangar.
    20386 has Redut forward, Uran in that slot in the middle, Kalibr via containers through the hatch aft.

    They said that second 20386 should be fitted with UKSK. There should be plenty of space to squeeze them in that middle slot where Uran currently is

    It can have it in a container under the deck. Uran is a cheap solution for anti shipping.

    I know but they want to replace Uran with UKSK like they did with Gremashi class. Container remains as a bonus.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16889
    Points : 17497
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Project 20836 Corvette/Frigate

    Post  GarryB on Tue Jul 04, 2017 11:53 am

    UKSK means anti sub as well as anti ship and land attack weapons so it is also more flexible.


    _________________
    “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
    hoom

    Posts : 642
    Points : 640
    Join date : 2016-05-06

    Re: Project 20836 Corvette/Frigate

    Post  hoom on Wed Jul 05, 2017 4:07 pm

    via Balancer 'how to fix 20386' Laughing
    avatar
    hoom

    Posts : 642
    Points : 640
    Join date : 2016-05-06

    Re: Project 20836 Corvette/Frigate

    Post  hoom on Sun Jul 16, 2017 8:15 am

    Pics of the 20386 model from IMDS http://foto-i-mir.ru/20386-imds-2017/




    A few changes as well as the round radar dome in the tripod:
    Much better firing arcs for the AK-630s (& 2 of them)
    Bit more superstructure above the bridge windows
    Perhaps more interesting is to count the radar rectangles forward vs aft, the big horizontal bottom one isn't there on the rear Shocked
    Actually I checked older model & that is same, but the HD render has it both ends.
    So I'm thinking that may represent a surface radar which would then be probably what the similar panels on Karakurt are for.
    But then the 20385 mast has them both front & back

    Technically doesn't preclude it being a surface radar & just a cost saving removing rear panels from the newer designs (but why not also remove the rear ones from 20385?)

    Edit: 2015 model pics here for comparison http://nevskii-bastion.ru/20386-imds-2015/
    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10778
    Points : 11257
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Project 20836 Corvette/Frigate

    Post  George1 on Thu Nov 02, 2017 5:02 am

    Article on 20386 project (half corvette/half frigate)

    https://navy-korabel.livejournal.com/173847.html


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

    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 5760
    Points : 5864
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Project 20836 Corvette/Frigate

    Post  PapaDragon on Thu Nov 02, 2017 1:37 pm

    George1 wrote:Article on 20386 project (half corvette/half frigate)

    https://navy-korabel.livejournal.com/173847.html

    I only glanced trough this but judging from last paragraph author sounds like someone strangled his cats because of this ship.

    Or am I interpreting it wrong?

    miroslav

    Posts : 70
    Points : 72
    Join date : 2016-11-16
    Location : Land of Serbia

    Re: Project 20836 Corvette/Frigate

    Post  miroslav on Thu Nov 02, 2017 6:53 pm

    PapaDragon wrote:
    George1 wrote:Article on 20386 project (half corvette/half frigate)

    https://navy-korabel.livejournal.com/173847.html

    I only glanced trough this but judging from last paragraph author sounds like someone strangled his cats because of this ship.

    Or am I interpreting it wrong?

    He is mostly right on all the points (my look on it as well).

    1. The anti ship weapons system is not adequate for a ship of that size (frigate), maybe for an 65 - 80 m corvette/FAC but not for an 105-110 m frigate, especially considering the idea that all combat ships should have a UKSK launcher (that was the whole point from the beginning).
    2. Increase from 12 to 16 SAM missile is not much (compared to the basic 20380).
    3. It has a 76 mm main gun not a 100 mm one.
    4. A single Pantsir (or equivalent) module would be better that 2 AK630, but it is still OK that it has an artillery based CIWS, if it turns out that it will have only one AK630, than it's SHIT in that way as well.
    5. It has to chose between a Helicopter and a 4 long range missile container carrier, THIS IS UNACCEPTABLE AND OUTRIGHT IDIOTIC, without a helicopter it cant carry out effective anti submarine operation, and with just 4 long range missile of the Kalibr family it cant do much offensively, THIS IS THE REASON IT SHOULD HAVE HAD A REAL UKSK LAUNCHER IN THE FIRST PLACE, then most other problems would not mater.

    Perceived positives:
    1. It has a many new technologies -> long testing phase with not that many bangs for the given bucks as the Muricans would say.
    2. Modular design ->  not at the expense of main fire power and lets not forget that Russia NEEDS COMBAT SHIPS, meaning ships that can sink other ships, escort convoys etc. Russia does not have the means or the resources to waste them on stuff that cant to the basic tasks effectively.
    3. Supports special operations missions -> not at the expense of main fire power.
    4. More endurance -> useless if it's not coupled with adequate main fire power.
    5. Cost effective -> based on entirely on the word of politicians.
    6. It looks futuristic -> has nothing to do with actual effectiveness.
    7. Its stealth -> its shit, the type that sits on an asphalt road roasted by the hot July sun.


    Conclusion: The 20385 and ESPECIALLY THE 11356 are far better ships, able to do the main tasks far more efficiently.
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 5760
    Points : 5864
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Project 20836 Corvette/Frigate

    Post  PapaDragon on Thu Nov 02, 2017 10:21 pm

    I rearranged your post so I can answer more elegantly, hope you don't mind.

    First, I am neither praising nor criticizing this ship because nobody really knows what it will contain. Just look at early images and specs for Karakurt and then compare it to what is actually built. Quite a few improvements.  

    So I will need to see this thing first before making a proper opinion.

    miroslav wrote:....
    He is mostly right on all the points (my look on it as well).

    1. The anti ship weapons system is not adequate for a ship of that size (frigate), maybe for an 65 - 80 m corvette/FAC but not for an 105-110 m frigate, especially considering the idea that all combat ships should have a UKSK launcher (that was the whole point from the beginning).

    5. It has to chose between a Helicopter and a 4 long range missile container carrier, THIS IS UNACCEPTABLE AND OUTRIGHT IDIOTIC, without a helicopter it cant carry out effective anti submarine operation, and with just 4 long range missile of the Kalibr family it cant do much offensively, THIS IS THE REASON IT SHOULD HAVE HAD A REAL UKSK LAUNCHER IN THE FIRST PLACE, then most other problems would not mater.

    2. Modular design ->  not at the expense of main fire power and lets not forget that Russia NEEDS COMBAT SHIPS, meaning ships that can sink other ships, escort convoys etc. Russia does not have the means or the resources to waste them on stuff that cant to the basic tasks effectively.....

    Main purpose of Russian surface navy is to go after enemy subs. They will never be able to stand up to surface navy the size of American one and they know it.

    Helicopter is main armament here, not guns or missiles because helicopter is most effective anti-sub tool.

    And they did say that later ships will be getting UKSK. Which leads me to next point:

    miroslav wrote:.....
    4. A single Pantsir (or equivalent) module would be better that 2 AK630, but it is still OK that it has an artillery based CIWS, if it turns out that it will have only one AK630, than it's SHIT in that way as well.....

    Like I said at the begining we don't know what final product will look like and even more importantly, we don't know what next hull will have because they have proven history of making changes to serial ships:

    Steregushi went from having Kashtan on first ship to Redut AA on all others.

    Karakurt went from having AK630 on first two to Pantsir on third one.

    Two new Molonyas were totally redesigned without even a peep in the news.

    miroslav wrote:
    Perceived positives:
    1. It has a many new technologies -> long testing phase with not that many bangs for the given bucks as the Muricans would say....

    They need to start putting new stuff somewhere at some point. Probably why Steregushi and Gremashi are still built in parallel to this one. But time marches on.

    Probably reason for light armament on first one, too much new stuff at once can be problematic.

    miroslav wrote:...
    2. Increase from 12 to 16 SAM missile is not much (compared to the basic 20380).
    3. It has a 76 mm main gun not a 100 mm one.....

    Guns are glorified decorations at this point unless we are talking about 120mm or larger ones because that is something that can use more advanced guided munitions.

    Trimming down the gun in order to fit more AA missiles is excellent decision in my book.

    miroslav wrote:
    4. More endurance -> useless if it's not coupled with adequate main fire power.

    This is actually really important because Russian Navy needs more long range ships since majority of newly built ones are short range.

    miroslav wrote:....
    Conclusion: The 20385 and ESPECIALLY THE 11356 are far better ships, able to do the main tasks far more efficiently.

    11356 is larger but not exactly better ship. It only has one UKSK system which is really light for vessel of that size and it relies on torpedoes for anti-sub work instead of missiles. Also 24 Shtil missiles is inferior to 16 Redut missiles especially for ship this big. Sonar and radars are not top shelf models either.  

    20385 has good armament but it is simply overstuffed. Original 20380 had Kashtan which was replaced with Redut. That took up lots of internal space. And then when they added UKSK and moved Redut in the back they probably erased any internal space still available. This had to have downsides.



    Long story short: wait and see. We still don't know what will this ship be like. I'll form opinion later.
    avatar
    miketheterrible

    Posts : 1565
    Points : 1565
    Join date : 2016-11-06

    Re: Project 20836 Corvette/Frigate

    Post  miketheterrible on Thu Nov 02, 2017 10:33 pm

    Russian navy can actually go up against most western ships because most western ships are rather poorly equipped for anti ship rolls in comparison to the rest of their navy and their ability to hit land targets. As well, Russia has quite the arsenal of long range anti ship supersonic missiles, something a lot or most western ships lack. Having anti ship capabilities is very important too. But it becomes rather hard to be able to integrate all of them into a ship of this size. I would think at least.
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 5760
    Points : 5864
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Project 20836 Corvette/Frigate

    Post  PapaDragon on Thu Nov 02, 2017 10:35 pm

    miketheterrible wrote:Russian navy can actually go up against most western ships because most western ships are rather poorly equipped for anti ship rolls in comparison to the rest of their navy and their ability to hit land targets.  As well, Russia has quite the arsenal of long range anti ship supersonic missiles, something a lot or most western ships lack.  Having anti ship capabilities is very important too.  But it becomes rather hard to be able to integrate all of them into a ship of this size.  I would think at least.

    US surface ships cannot destroy Russian cities. Subs can. Hence priority is on anti-sub work.
    avatar
    miketheterrible

    Posts : 1565
    Points : 1565
    Join date : 2016-11-06

    Re: Project 20836 Corvette/Frigate

    Post  miketheterrible on Thu Nov 02, 2017 10:43 pm

    PapaDragon wrote:
    miketheterrible wrote:Russian navy can actually go up against most western ships because most western ships are rather poorly equipped for anti ship rolls in comparison to the rest of their navy and their ability to hit land targets.  As well, Russia has quite the arsenal of long range anti ship supersonic missiles, something a lot or most western ships lack.  Having anti ship capabilities is very important too.  But it becomes rather hard to be able to integrate all of them into a ship of this size.  I would think at least.

    US surface ships cannot destroy Russian cities. Subs can. Hence priority is on anti-sub work.

    yes, that makes sense. I am just saying though that Russian ships having antiship capabilities is also very important. It is all about trying to fit all that into one ship. Which I think Grigorovich did. but I have to verify that one myself.

    I know with Redut they want to utilize all aspects - short, medium and long range air defense. What about Shtil-1 though? That is rather very capable, used widely in China, and could also have relatively long range missiles too, no?

    Kh-35 missiles of latest modification can also attack land targets as well as ships. So that is also an ideal system too.
    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 1747
    Points : 1787
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Project 20836 Corvette/Frigate

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Fri Nov 03, 2017 12:40 am

    miketheterrible wrote:

    Kh-35 missiles of latest modification can also attack land targets as well as ships.  So that is also an ideal system too.

    But their range is still belów 300km
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 5760
    Points : 5864
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Project 20836 Corvette/Frigate

    Post  PapaDragon on Fri Nov 03, 2017 1:39 am

    GunshipDemocracy wrote:
    miketheterrible wrote:

    Kh-35 missiles of latest modification can also attack land targets as well as ships.  So that is also an ideal system too.

    But their range is still belów 300km

    They should develop anti-sub version of Kh-35, should be simple enough

    Having Uran launcher compatible anti-sub missile would really give ships some extra flexibility
    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 1747
    Points : 1787
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Project 20836 Corvette/Frigate

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Fri Nov 03, 2017 2:00 am

    PapaDragon wrote:
    GunshipDemocracy wrote:
    miketheterrible wrote:

    Kh-35 missiles of latest modification can also attack land targets as well as ships.  So that is also an ideal system too.

    But their range is still belów 300km

    They should develop anti-sub version of Kh-35, should be simple enough

    Having Uran launcher compatible anti-sub missile would really give ships some extra flexibility

    For this would be enough using rocket torpedoes in Calber containers. Maybe indeed with many Karakurts having something with better AA and antisub protection makes sense. The only question is price. Looks like 22350 is less expensive then 20386.
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 5760
    Points : 5864
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Project 20836 Corvette/Frigate

    Post  PapaDragon on Sat Nov 25, 2017 2:37 am

    '
    This image of new Karakurt pretty much solves that UKSK dilemma for Derzkii class. It can easily fit into the slot where Uran launchers are located:
    avatar
    hoom

    Posts : 642
    Points : 640
    Join date : 2016-05-06

    Re: Project 20836 Corvette/Frigate

    Post  hoom on Sat Nov 25, 2017 9:24 am

    Obviously yes the volume of that slot is more than ample for a UKSK module.
    Whether there is top-weight for it I dunno, as is it looks pretty top-heavy already.

    I still can't think of a really legit reason for its absence in the first place.
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 5760
    Points : 5864
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Project 20836 Corvette/Frigate

    Post  PapaDragon on Sat Nov 25, 2017 2:50 pm

    hoom wrote:Obviously yes the volume of that slot is more than ample for a UKSK module.
    Whether there is top-weight for it I dunno, as is it looks pretty top-heavy already.

    I still can't think of a really legit reason for its absence in the first place.

    Price probably, they may want to keep price of first ship in class low
    avatar
    Vladimir79

    Posts : 2191
    Points : 3083
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Re: Project 20836 Corvette/Frigate

    Post  Vladimir79 on Sat Nov 25, 2017 3:31 pm

    PapaDragon wrote:
    hoom wrote:Obviously yes the volume of that slot is more than ample for a UKSK module.
    Whether there is top-weight for it I dunno, as is it looks pretty top-heavy already.

    I still can't think of a really legit reason for its absence in the first place.

    Price probably, they may want to keep price of first ship in class low

    Not only initial price but operational cost. To keep a full load of missiles constantly on the ready is expensive, even the USN doesn't go to sea with full load-outs unless in wartime.


    _________________
    The true value of life knows only the paratrooper. For he is more likely to look death in the eye.  -- Vasily Margelov
    avatar
    Isos

    Posts : 971
    Points : 969
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: Project 20836 Corvette/Frigate

    Post  Isos on Sat Nov 25, 2017 4:00 pm

    Vladimir79 wrote:
    PapaDragon wrote:
    hoom wrote:Obviously yes the volume of that slot is more than ample for a UKSK module.
    Whether there is top-weight for it I dunno, as is it looks pretty top-heavy already.

    I still can't think of a really legit reason for its absence in the first place.

    Price probably, they may want to keep price of first ship in class low

    Not only initial price but operational cost.  To keep a full load of missiles constantly on the ready is expensive, even the USN doesn't go to sea with full load-outs unless in wartime.

    Isn't it the same to store missiles in UKSK or in a storage complexe on land ?
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 5760
    Points : 5864
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Project 20836 Corvette/Frigate

    Post  PapaDragon on Sun Nov 26, 2017 5:08 pm

    Isos wrote:..............

    Isn't it the same to store missiles in UKSK or in a storage complexe on land ?

    Well, missiles stored in warehouse on land don't move and shake with the ship so that might also factor in but this is just guesswork on my part... dunno



    ALSO:

    Navy expects to receive three new project 20386 corvette by 2025

    http://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/4756219

    They want 10 overall, looks like Steregushi class will officially be superseded

    Sponsored content

    Re: Project 20836 Corvette/Frigate

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Mon Dec 18, 2017 12:35 am