Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Share

    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5840
    Points : 5892
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  TR1 on Wed Dec 07, 2011 9:43 am

    Capability wise, it is not obsolete though.

    Production stopped indeed, but there is enough stock to last through this decade at least, since not that many boats deploy with it at one time - Peter and the 949s, not all of which are even combat capable at one time (regular maintenance cycle).


    runaway
    Master Sergeant
    Master Sergeant

    Posts : 351
    Points : 372
    Join date : 2010-11-12
    Location : Sweden

    Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  runaway on Wed Dec 07, 2011 2:57 pm

    "Maximum Mach number: 1.6-2.5
    Range: 550 - 625 km (342 - 388 miles)
    Platforms: Kirov CGN, Kuznetsov CVG, Oscar SSGN"

    The missile has a Hi-Hi-Hi profile, which makes it somewhat outdated. Also, i doubt it can withstand a modern high density ecm coverage.

    After the Peter and K has been refitted, the Oscar is the only platform left.
    So the stock will be large, yes.


    Firebird
    Lieutenant Colonel
    Lieutenant Colonel

    Posts : 915
    Points : 947
    Join date : 2011-10-14

    Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  Firebird on Wed Dec 07, 2011 5:30 pm

    runaway wrote:
    Firebird wrote:Personally, the idea that ANY of the 5 Kirov hulls should be scrapped is horrifying.


    He stressed that the powerplant would face no changes. "Development works are supposed to finish in April, and then drawing up of repair and modernization project will start. Sevmash won't work on this project in 2012", said Diachkov.

    Diachkov emphasized that only modernization of Admiral Nakhimov was in question. "Take note, I'm talking of only Nakhimov. The similar cruiser Admiral Ushakov is laid up at Zvezdochka ship-repair plant, but she's already written off", said the interviewee.

    Big news.
    First, the Kirov is written off and will be scrapped. And i am almost certain the Frunze will be scrapped too.
    That leaves only two left, Nakhimov(Kalinin) and Peter.

    Second, the modernization sounds limited, it wont include propulsion, and thats a real shame. Also, if they were to replace all obselete electronics, they could have a whole team working with only that, and still not be ready 2012. But, all work is halted, quite a mysteri if you ask me.

    Third, Peter is due to be modernized after Nakhimov, if Nakhimov have to wait, Peter have to wait, and is already aging fast. Some systems would be near obselete, for example the Main weapon, Granit missiles.
    So the combat value of a Cruiser comissioned 1998, without any significant upgrade, is somewhat limited.

    Forth, sorry firebird, but it seems clear that 3 of the 5 Kirov hulls will be scrapped, and we will have to wait for some years to see what is to become of the last 2.

    Last, the Yak-38 Vtol, was a terrible plane, combat value almost zero. Let it rest in peace.

    Btw, i very much doubt the US planned to go up against one Kirov with 4 Carriers. The airwing of One is 90 planes, and and say 30 of these can be used in an attack.
    Well, 30 planes with several missiles each, and perhaps SSM from the escort, would overwhelm even a Kirov battlegroup.




    I think there's a huge danger in taking off the cuff comments and translating them into English. Over 12 yrs ago, KIrov was ready for dismantling. Then in late 2011, its gonna be refitted by 2020. The worth of a scrapped ship is negligible. The worth of an upgradeable cruiser is huge. I'm just suspecting that Ushakov will stay as she is for a few yrs. BTW, I saw some 2010 pics of her, complete with new paint.


    I agree, the latest Yak was terrible. But, earlier ones had the makings of something pretty good IMO. Really, I'm looking at the situation that while the Kuznetsov is being refitted, Russia will have zero carriers and just 1 / 2 heavy cruisers. Which is completely insufficient, and therefore necessitates stop gap measures being looked at. Britain got by with small carriers and VTOL - so maybe there is an argument for a Russian stopgap like that?

    The stat I gave u was one I read - re the situation in the 1990s/ In reality a US carrier and Kirov cruiser would be part of their battlegroups. My suspicion is that the Kirov's missiles would take out a carrier pretty early on. How a KIrov might fare against aerial attacks, well thats hard to work out. Either way, Kirovs are still extremely formidable IMO. Tho best with the latest missile tech

    The possible thing I could think that might invalidate the Kirovs is the abilty to "power pack" a stealth based ship based on the new nuclear destroyer plans. But, I dont think those smaller ships will be able to meet the spec of an upgraded Kirov. As Garry suggested.

    Either way, 4 KIrovs isn't that much. Say the Navy needed 1 for the Pacific( say defending the Kurils), 1 for the Med( eg Syria) or Black Sea ( trouble in the Caucuses). Imagine 1 in refit, or flying the flag in Venezuela / Cuba / training exercises wherever. Then there's defending the North. Its not hard to think of a situation where the Navy is seriously short of ships. Suddenly 4 Kirovs doesnt look like a luxury.

    runaway
    Master Sergeant
    Master Sergeant

    Posts : 351
    Points : 372
    Join date : 2010-11-12
    Location : Sweden

    Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  runaway on Wed Dec 07, 2011 8:30 pm

    Firebird wrote:

    I think there's a huge danger in taking off the cuff comments and translating them into English. Over 12 yrs ago, KIrov was ready for dismantling. Then in late 2011, its gonna be refitted by 2020. The worth of a scrapped ship is negligible. The worth of an upgradeable cruiser is huge. I'm just suspecting that Ushakov will stay as she is for a few yrs. BTW, I saw some 2010 pics of her, complete with new paint.

    I really hope you`re right there. If the hull is in good shape, it`s a huge advantage to modernize a Kirov, then to start building from scratch. Also, the design is very succesful, it just need new weapons, sensors and electronics. And yes, a new all nuclear propulsion would be a great upgrade.


    I agree, the latest Yak was terrible. But, earlier ones had the makings of something pretty good IMO. Really, I'm looking at the situation that while the Kuznetsov is being refitted, Russia will have zero carriers and just 1 / 2 heavy cruisers. Which is completely insufficient, and therefore necessitates stop gap measures being looked at. Britain got by with small carriers and VTOL - so maybe there is an argument for a Russian stopgap like that?

    Yes, it would be, if they hadnt scrapped the Kiev class way premature.
    What about not selling the Admiral Gorshkov!!
    No, thats impossible, if they dont want to scrap their arms reputation.
    I think we can get along these years with only the Mistrals as baby carriers.


    Either way, 4 KIrovs isn't that much. Say the Navy needed 1 for the Pacific( say defending the Kurils), 1 for the Med( eg Syria) or Black Sea ( trouble in the Caucuses). Imagine 1 in refit, or flying the flag in Venezuela / Cuba / training exercises wherever. Then there's defending the North. Its not hard to think of a situation where the Navy is seriously short of ships. Suddenly 4 Kirovs doesnt look like a luxury.

    Agree, and we cant forget that the Slava cruisers are also in need of a thouroly modernization.
    So, the Navy needs every hull of Kirovs and Slavas, including the "Ukraine" cruiser.

    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5840
    Points : 5892
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  TR1 on Wed Dec 07, 2011 8:51 pm

    runaway wrote:"Maximum Mach number: 1.6-2.5
    Range: 550 - 625 km (342 - 388 miles)
    Platforms: Kirov CGN, Kuznetsov CVG, Oscar SSGN"

    The missile has a Hi-Hi-Hi profile, which makes it somewhat outdated. Also, i doubt it can withstand a modern high density ecm coverage.

    After the Peter and K has been refitted, the Oscar is the only platform left.
    So the stock will be large, yes.


    The profile is not all high. The missile can for example fly low, while one of the swarm flies high and transmits targeting data.

    If Granit is outdated, then so is 90% of the Russian naval inventory. And a big portion of the American on too actually.
    Kuz doesn't carry it anymore, but I have trouble seeing the Peter refitted this decade.

    Ukraine would be a huge money waste, the 22350 can accomplish as much (more actually) and would not require expensive refit and modernization, and would enjoy a much greater service life. Let that thing rot away, we don't need another money sink.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15490
    Points : 16197
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  GarryB on Thu Dec 08, 2011 2:25 am

    Second, the modernization sounds limited, it wont include propulsion, and thats a real shame. Also, if they were to replace all obselete electronics, they could have a whole team working with only that, and still not be ready 2012. But, all work is halted, quite a mysteri if you ask me.

    If they do upgrade two of the class then this will not be their only upgrade... remember the Kuznetsov will be on blocks till 2017 or later, from about 2013, and the article you posted above says they wont upgrade the vessels in 2012... As far as I know they haven't even formulated an upgrade path yet... except that they need to replace the Granits because they are no longer in production.
    Of course the introduction into service if the UKSK system that is pretty much optimised for Onyx clearly shows that Onyx will replace the Granit.

    Keep in mind that Onyx was the replacement for Moskit, and the Yakhont is the reduced range export version of the Onyx.

    For all we know Onyx could have a flight range of 500-700km.

    Third, Peter is due to be modernized after Nakhimov, if Nakhimov have to wait, Peter have to wait, and is already aging fast. Some systems would be near obselete, for example the Main weapon, Granit missiles.
    So the combat value of a Cruiser comissioned 1998, without any significant upgrade, is somewhat limited.

    I doubt they have finalised the upgrade plans yet and will probably try them on one before applying them to the second, so they can ensure the result is worth it.
    Granit is not obsolete and is currently the most capable known anti ship missile in service.
    Newer missiles might have better electronics, but the Granit has a digital datalink that allows it to pass back target data via satellite link to the launch ship or submarine giving a radar image of the carrier group being attacked.

    From memory it was able to be launched in "teams" of 12, so fire off 12 missiles and they will operate together... flying at low altitude, with one missile climbing to about 1,000m to do a radar scan of the target group of ships. It would then drop back down and analyse the radar scan to determine how many ships were in the battle group and based on their size it would allocate missiles amongst the 12 to targets... obviously a carrier would get any nuclear armed missiles targeted at it, or several conventionally armed missiles to ensure they were hit hard. It would also transmit its radar view of the carrier group back to the launch platform via the satellite that spotted the carrier group in the first place.

    A Kirov class could send two volleys of 10 missiles, while an Oscar could send two volleys of 12 missiles... if the lead missile was somehow shot down another missile in the group would be voted lead missile and take over the lead missile role.

    The target will detect a single missile pop up and radar scan the fleet from 100-150km away but it will drop back down before any SAM launched by the carrier group could reach it... next thing you know is a spread out formation of supersonic missiles comes over the radar horizon... which is why AWACS and aircraft are so vital to ships at sea...

    Last, the Yak-38 Vtol, was a terrible plane, combat value almost zero. Let it rest in peace.

    True but did you see the plans for the Yak-43?

    25 ton engine based on the NK-32 and stealthy shape...

    Btw, i very much doubt the US planned to go up against one Kirov with 4 Carriers. The airwing of One is 90 planes, and and say 30 of these can be used in an attack.
    Well, 30 planes with several missiles each, and perhaps SSM from the escort, would overwhelm even a Kirov battlegroup.

    Depends whose back yard it is... with land based fighter support... Plus of course a few Oscars would certainly add to the Granits carried by the Kirov... especially if one in 4 are nukes.

    Its no longer in production. And was developed in the 70-s.

    AFAIK their Slavas are carrying Vulkans... which may be in low rate production, but the replacement will be Onyx.

    They don't seem to be in a huge hurry to introduce the Onyx... so perhaps they are waiting for Onyx II hypersonic model.

    The missile has a Hi-Hi-Hi profile, which makes it somewhat outdated. Also, i doubt it can withstand a modern high density ecm coverage.

    Who told you it was a Hi hi hi missile?

    The whole purpose behind its high flight speed is because it is acknowledged it will be detected at long range.

    Also the Russians are not stupid... they have plenty of large high speed anti ship missiles that have high and low flight options... low reduces range and speed, but high makes it more vulnerable to detection and interception, so for instance the Kh-15 is designed to go high... 40,000m high.

    After the Peter and K has been refitted, the Oscar is the only platform left.
    So the stock will be large, yes.

    Oscar and Oscar II.

    Which is completely insufficient, and therefore necessitates stop gap measures being looked at. Britain got by with small carriers and VTOL - so maybe there is an argument for a Russian stopgap like that?

    They will be getting Mistrals in 2013-2014...

    Either way, 4 KIrovs isn't that much. Say the Navy needed 1 for the Pacific( say defending the Kurils), 1 for the Med( eg Syria) or Black Sea ( trouble in the Caucuses). Imagine 1 in refit, or flying the flag in Venezuela / Cuba / training exercises wherever. Then there's defending the North. Its not hard to think of a situation where the Navy is seriously short of ships. Suddenly 4 Kirovs doesnt look like a luxury.

    I agree that 4 would be best, they will not have a Kirov in the Black Sea... it is just too small of a pond and vulnerable to land based NATO countries.

    Also, the design is very succesful, it just need new weapons, sensors and electronics. And yes, a new all nuclear propulsion would be a great upgrade.

    When they are building carriers they have repeated several times that they will have nuclear propulsion, so they will need to develop and perfect them for those. The fact that even their destroyers will be nukes suggests they want a low footprint force, so they might have decided that they only want two large capital ships... one for the Northern Fleet and one for the Pacific.

    I think it is important to keep in mind that until they finalise the upgrades they wont know how much they will cost and what state the ship needs to be in to be viable. A ship that needs a new reactor will be written off if the upgrade they intend does not include a new reactor simply because it will add cost and complication to the intended upgrade.

    They might want cheap and simple upgrades now to wait for technology and shipyard skills to improve and in 15 years give them a much more complete upgrade.

    Of course by then they might have mastered large ship building to the point where they might want to scratch build a thoroughly new vessel.

    Agree, and we cant forget that the Slava cruisers are also in need of a thouroly modernization.
    So, the Navy needs every hull of Kirovs and Slavas, including the "Ukraine" cruiser.

    You are quite right, the Kirovs are beautiful ships, but the Slavas were built for the same role but cheaper.

    The main problem would be the Slavas don't suit the same upgrades the Kirov suits as the 20 Granit tubes on Kirov could be easily be replaced by UKSK tubes and suddenly you can load anti ship or anti sub or land attack missiles, so it occupies the same space and adds flexibility.
    On the Slava the missiles are above deck so taking them off will reduce top weight, but not free up internal space to fit the UKSK tubes so you will need to make internal changes to make space for them... and of course they are quite deep so they take up lot of area internally.

    If the new carriers are going to be nuke propelled however it will make sense to make the remaining Slavas nukes as well.

    Part of the point of these upgrades is standardisation. New vessels in the Russian navy will have the same missile systems and the same electronics and similar sensors and similar propulsion and gun armament so having these same things added to older vessels in upgrades makes a lot of sense... even if it costs a little more now, in the long term it means standardisation of parts and support and training and maintainence.

    They have a budget and they need to make judgement calls about how to spend it. I think at a bare minimum they need two Kirovs... one for each major fleet, but I also think a decent upgrade of the Kuz would be useful... if they can make her a nuke and add EM cats with fixed wing AWACS then she will become much more capable. By 2020 she could have naval PAK FAs on her... imagine the US and UK Navies whining about the Ruskies having heavy 5th gen fighters on carriers, while they might or might not have F-35s... he he he he. Twisted Evil

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15490
    Points : 16197
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  GarryB on Fri Dec 09, 2011 10:39 am

    Modernization of Cruiser Admiral Nakhimov to Start After 2012

    Modernization of Cruiser Admiral Nakhimov to Start After 2012 06.12.2011
    Text: RIA Novosti
    Photo: Nuclear-powered missile cruiser Admiral Nakhimov. nswap.info
    Modernization of Project 1144 Orlan nuclear-powered missile cruiser Admiral Nakhimov will start at Sevmash shipyard after 2012; the emphasis will be put on enhancement of missile arms, said the shipyard's director general Andrei Diachkov in the interview to RIA Novosti.

    Cruiser Admiral Nakhimov has been mothballed at Sevmash for the recent ten years.

    "This would be a quite considerable arms enhancement, especially the ship's missile system. Today, the cruiser is still armed with Granit cruise missiles which are out of production now. Nobody is satisfied with their power and range any more, so we plan to mount the new mighty missile weapon – Caliber and Onyx systems", Diachkov said.

    He stressed that the powerplant would face no changes. "Development works are supposed to finish in April, and then drawing up of repair and modernization project will start. Sevmash won't work on this project in 2012", said Diachkov.

    According to him, defense ministry initially planned to sign two contracts at once, i.e. one for development works, and another for repair and upgrading. "In the course of talks, we have reached a conclusion that it was pointless to continue work on the ship without final version of modernization project. That is why, it was decided to suspend repair works at the shipyard", said the Sevmash's director. He said the contract for development of a reduced technical project had been tied with Severnoye Design Bureau. The bureau will determine the way for the ship's modernization.

    Defense ministry agreed to pay for the ship's maintenance at the yard's quay for the period of development works, noted the interviewee.

    Diachkov emphasized that only modernization of Admiral Nakhimov was in question. "Take note, I'm talking of only Nakhimov. The similar cruiser Admiral Ushakov is laid up at Zvezdochka ship-repair plant, but she's already written off", said the interviewee.

    Presently, Russian Navy has in inventory only one ship of that project – missile cruiser Petr Veliky. She is the world's biggest non-aircraft-carrying attack warship designed for destruction of large sea surface targets, protection of deployed naval forces from aerial attacks, and antisubmarine warfare in distant sea and ocean zones.

    The nuclear-powered cruiser was handed over to Russian Navy in 1998. Her standard displacement is about 24,000 tons, full displacement is 26,000 tons. Mighty nuclear-powered plant makes possible to accelerate up to 31 knots (60 kph). The cruiser's length is 251 meters, beam is 28.5 meters, height is 59 meters, crew is over 800 men.

    Basic weapon is Granit P-700 (3M-45, Shipwreck) antiship supersonic cruise missiles. Twenty missiles are located under main deck at launch angle of 60 degrees. The ship also has various advanced arms to hit surface targets, submarines, and repel aerial attacks. Petr Veliky has no analogs worldwide.

    The part I highlighted in bold above I find interesting... it has been mentioned by a naval source that the Klub/Kalibre system is limited to 300km or less in the export models only and these weapons that are similar in size to the Tomahawk, are also similar in range at about 2,000km for the anti ship and land attack domestic models.

    It says the upgrade will focus on the missiles so I assume that will mean the removal of the Granit launch bins and probably Rif-M, and of course the SS-N-14 system at the front of the ship, and also probably the replacement of the SA-N-8 Klinok system as well.

    The UKSK vertical launch system will allow the replacement of the Granit and SS-N-14 with similar or better missiles... depending on the actual range of the Oniks... its electronics are from the mid 1990s and have probably already been updated several times... note the RVV-MD is an R-73 with modern digital processors and upgraded parts including a new rocket motor, so I don't see why they wouldn't upgrade the Onix too.

    The Redut SAM system would be an ideal replacement for the Rif-M, and either more Redut bins with 40km range and 120km range missiles replacing the Klinok or an updated Klinok or Pantsir-S1 could replace Klinok and Kashtan-M.

    The 130mm twin guns could be replaced by the new 152mm twin gun turret based on Coalition, which would allow a significant range increase plus Glonass guided shells, which would be a significant step forward.

    This would require a radar upgrade and some electronics.

    The question is, will they make the overhaul simple and quick and cheap and then apply it to Peter the Great, and leave a deeper upgrade to later when they have built a few medium sized ships like Destroyers... remember so far they are building Corvettes and slowly putting together Frigates.

    Certainly getting Sigma installed on the Kirovs would be vital if they see them as being the flagships for the northern and pacific fleet... they are installing Sigma on everything including Corvettes, so their flagships need it.

    Obviously the UKSK is also capable of carrying long heavy missiles including the Kh-101 and Kh-102 and the Kirov (Orlan) class would be ideal platforms for such missiles... there are not many countries with air forces that can fly 5,000km offshore to take on the ship that is launching 5,500km range cruise missiles at their ports... even if it was alone it could take on quite a large number of aircraft at once.

    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5840
    Points : 5892
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  TR1 on Fri Dec 09, 2011 12:24 pm

    What I want to know is if Clubs with the supersonic final stage are going to be procured, and the range possible with them. Very potent weapon.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15490
    Points : 16197
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  GarryB on Fri Dec 09, 2011 9:22 pm

    Well if the Klubs for export have a range of 220km and 300km for the subsonic and supersonic versions respectively, and the 300km range Klub in Russian service has a range of 2,000km, then I would suspect that the supersonic missile would have a range on the order of 1,000-1,200km or so.

    The problem of course is the fact that a subsonic missile with a range of that magnitude will have problems with a moving target such as a ship.

    Of course if you give it a satellite link that updates it in real time about the targets location then the problem is solved to a degree, and in terms of a solution having a long range missile with a terminal attack speed of mach 2.9 at low level is quite impressive performance.

    It simply makes a carrier a necessary component of any naval force as long range detection via AWACS and outer ring protection of a combat air patrol become vital in dealing with such a threat.

    runaway
    Master Sergeant
    Master Sergeant

    Posts : 351
    Points : 372
    Join date : 2010-11-12
    Location : Sweden

    Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  runaway on Sat Dec 10, 2011 6:04 pm

    GarryB wrote:Nobody is satisfied with their power and range any more, so we plan to mount the new mighty missile weapon – Caliber and Onyx systems", Diachkov said.

    ky has no analogs worldwide.

    The part I highlighted in bold above I find interesting... it has been mentioned by a naval source that the Klub/Kalibre system is limited to 300km or less in the export models only and these weapons that are similar in size to the Tomahawk, are also similar in range at about 2,000km for the anti ship and land attack domestic models.

    So, even the Navy thinks the Granit is outdated, not just me.
    And i call it a Hi-Hi-Hi trajectory, as it certainly isnt a sea skimmer.



    The 130mm twin guns could be replaced by the new 152mm twin gun turret based on Coalition, which would allow a significant range increase plus Glonass guided shells, which would be a significant step forward.

    This would require a radar upgrade and some electronics..

    I havent read of any new 152mm gun turrets, but agree, new glonass shells would be very effective,... and very expensive.


    The question is, will they make the overhaul simple and quick and cheap and then apply it to Peter the Great, and leave a deeper upgrade to later when they have built a few medium sized ships like Destroyers... remember so far they are building Corvettes and slowly putting together Frigates.

    I think the overhaul now would be relatively quick, as they soon runs out of Modern capital ships. It wont do to leave the Kirovs on a 7-10 years rebuilding.


    The Yak-43 was to have been the third generation VTOL/STOL fighter, to follow and eventually replace the Yak-141M..

    Yes, i think there is still a need for a "Harrier" type jet. As it could be employed on Mistrals and yes, even container ships.

    To bad it wasnt developed, now the F35 II will be the only one.






    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15490
    Points : 16197
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  GarryB on Sun Dec 11, 2011 1:26 am

    So, even the Navy thinks the Granit is outdated, not just me.

    They think that because it was manufactured in the Ukraine and is no longer produced.

    The purpose of the Oniks was to replace the Granit, so they want to upgrade the platforms with Granit to use the UKSK launcher... just common sense really.

    BTW they also think the AK-74M is outdated, but even in 20 years time it will still be a lethal and effective weapon.

    And i call it a Hi-Hi-Hi trajectory, as it certainly isnt a sea skimmer.

    It is not a sea skimmer by any means, but read this:
    (right click and choose "save link as" to download the pdf)

    www.dtig.org/docs/Russian-Soviet%20Naval%20Missiles.pdf

    I havent read of any new 152mm gun turrets, but agree, new glonass shells would be very effective,... and very expensive.



    A joint development with the Army and Navy to develop a new long range 152mm artillery system. They can both share development costs and unify the design of the gun and ammo to simplify production and training. The main problem for the Army is that the land vehicle has a turret so big it wont fit on standard aircraft. The likely solution will be the removal of the top gun and dual feed auto loader for the top gun to make the turret smaller.
    It will still use the same high pressure long range ammo.
    The GLONASS guidance systems is basically an electronic fuse attached to the nose of the round with small control surfaces (fins) to steer the round onto target. CEP is 10m or less for accuracy in all weather day or night. At $1,000 per fuse it is actually pretty cheap, and compared to the US equivalent it is actually 50 times cheaper.

    In terms of the Navy, they will get a much longer range gun with a heavier shell with much greater accuracy than the standard 130mm gun which is not used by the Russian Army.

    This will be orders of magnitude cheaper than missiles and will offer a very powerful naval gun support capability for landing forces.

    I think the overhaul now would be relatively quick, as they soon runs out of Modern capital ships. It wont do to leave the Kirovs on a 7-10 years rebuilding.

    I agree. I think if they are going to keep the standard propulsion for now that a quick update of the primary missile systems and possibly an introduction of Sigma to enable communications with other vessels in the Russian navy, and if it all goes well then the Peter the Great will go in and have a similar upgrade. Once that is achieved they will need to decide a future for their Oscars and Oscar IIs, as replacing those Granits with Oniks missiles would remove the Granits from the fleet, which will improve logistics and commonality.
    If the UKSK launchers are used for the upgrade it means the platforms suddenly become much more capable as the Granit, like the Oniks are anti Ship missiles ONLY, but the UKSK launch tubes add a ASROC/Subroc type Klub, plus land attack and anti ship missile capability so the Oscars and Kirovs suddenly become much more flexible and capable vessels.

    Yes, i think there is still a need for a "Harrier" type jet. As it could be employed on Mistrals and yes, even container ships.

    To bad it wasnt developed, now the F35 II will be the only one.

    I remember seeing models of proposed Soviet carriers in the 1970s and 1980s and they showed Mig-23s and Mig-27s on fixed wing carriers. Any art now of future Russian carriers might show Mig-29Ks and Su-33s, but at the end of the day in 2025-2030 when the first one or two new Russian carriers hit the water I rather suspect they will be carrying Pak Fa based aircraft. The Harrier is a very capable aircraft within its limitations, but a naval PAK FA will be much more practical use than any updated Harrier... even one modified from a steath fighter like the F-35 II. I really can't see the VSTOL F-35 actually making it to service.

    BTW the Yak-43 actually looked like a really big F-35, but its line drawing design is from the mid 1980s.

    runaway
    Master Sergeant
    Master Sergeant

    Posts : 351
    Points : 372
    Join date : 2010-11-12
    Location : Sweden

    Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  runaway on Sun Dec 11, 2011 9:25 pm

    GarryB wrote:BTW they also think the AK-74M is outdated, but even in 20 years time it will still be a lethal and effective weapon.

    The AK-74M is still amongst the worlds very best assault rifles, so there they are clearly wrong. Hovwever, i think its time to replace it, so to stay in forefront of opponents.




    A joint development with the Army and Navy to develop a new long range 152mm artillery system. They can both share development costs and unify the design of the gun and ammo to simplify production and training. The main problem for the Army is that the land vehicle has a turret so big it wont fit on standard aircraft. The likely solution will be the removal of the top gun and dual feed auto loader for the top gun to make the turret smaller.
    It will still use the same high pressure long range ammo.
    The GLONASS guidance systems is basically an electronic fuse attached to the nose of the round with small control surfaces (fins) to steer the round onto target. CEP is 10m or less for accuracy in all weather day or night. At $1,000 per fuse it is actually pretty cheap, and compared to the US equivalent it is actually 50 times cheaper.

    In terms of the Navy, they will get a much longer range gun with a heavier shell with much greater accuracy than the standard 130mm gun which is not used by the Russian Army.

    I very much, very much doubt this solution. This remainds me of the failure of the Kirov class cruisers from the 30-40`s.


    The guns were mounted in a single cradle to minimize space and were so close together that their dispersion was very high because the muzzle blast from adjacent guns affected each gun.

    Unless the 152 guns fire in cycles, and not at the same time.
    Of course they must, nobody can make such a mistake twice.

    And the GPS guided 155 shells are not US, they are Excalibur, Swedish made. They are so expensive that they only are to be used against high value targets, ie, not Talibans...

    Nope, at the moment the F35 and F22 planes, dont look like a succes. But i would still like to see a russian "Harrier" version of PAK-FA!(How about that)

    Now lets hope The Nakhimov will have a swift and succesful refurbing.


    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15490
    Points : 16197
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  GarryB on Mon Dec 12, 2011 12:30 am

    The AK-74M is still amongst the worlds very best assault rifles, so there they are clearly wrong. Hovwever, i think its time to replace it, so to stay in forefront of opponents.

    I totally agree. I am left handed so the controls are all very ergonomically designed for me already. With my hand on the pistol grip and finger ready to pull the trigger I can easily adjust the fire selector/safety... if it is urgent then the clack wont matter, if it is not urgent then I can grasp the piece that sticks out and pinch it out so it moves silently, and then I can rack back the cocking handle and load the weapon ready to fire with my eye looking down the sights at all times and my finger on the trigger.

    It is incredibly easy to strip and maintain and in 5.45mm calibre should be as effective as any other assault rifle in the world right now.

    It is not perfect, but claims it is not easy to add kit to are ridiculous as the kit we are talking about is western kit... it is the same as saying that a standard PSO-1 Soviet rifle scope with its side bracket mounting is no easy to fit to a Steyr AUG, or M4 or M16 or G36... well duh!!!

    They go on about the rail system, but the AK series has equipment that just clipped on and off as easily as a bayonet for decades. Underbarrel grenade launchers that didn't need the front stock of the rifle replaced, and scopes that latch on and off and of course the barrels threaded for suppressors.

    Sorry... OT here, but the point is that while progress is good... it should also make sense.

    Upgrading the Granit, which was designed and built in the late 1970s makes sense during a period of upgrading all your equipment... especially when the Granit is no longer in production... which is about the only feature in my opinion that makes it obsolete.

    A reduction in warhead weigh and replace all the electronics and servo motors and control surfaces with new stuff would probably greatly reduce weight, plus a more modern radar set and new much more efficient motor and performance would either take a huge leap up, or weight could be dramatically reduced again.

    When I said the Onix is the replacement for the Granit that was not strictly true as the Onix is the replacement for the Moskit, or SS-N-22 Sunburn, which was not a replacement for the Granit and was designed specifically to defeat AEGIS. At the time the Moskit flew at a max height of 300m when scanning for targets and then dropped down to below 7m for the terminal attack. It was a low all the way weapon with a range of 120km, and for much of its service life should have been effective in its intended role. Standard SAMS couldn't hit targets below 10m so they would have had Phalanx to protect them... and Phalanx is ineffectual against sea skimming targets let alone supersonic ones.

    I very much, very much doubt this solution. This remainds me of the failure of the Kirov class cruisers from the 30-40`s.

    Unless the 152 guns fire in cycles, and not at the same time.
    Of course they must, nobody can make such a mistake twice.

    Except the fact that they made it in the first place shows it was not a mistake as such, but a solution with an inherent problem. If the guns fire together then the side shift effect of the adjacent muzzle blast can be calculated and added to the ballistics calculation as it will be consistent and regular.

    The problem wasn't the guns side by side, it was the lack of modern 21st C digital ballistic computers and satellite guided shells.

    And the GPS guided 155 shells are not US, they are Excalibur, Swedish made. They are so expensive that they only are to be used against high value targets, ie, not Talibans...

    They are the shells the US has available to use... unless they want to buy these new Russian fuses...

    I suspect the French military might consider buying them... they bought Krasnopol-M laser guided 155mm shells from the Russians.

    Nope, at the moment the F35 and F22 planes, dont look like a succes. But i would still like to see a russian "Harrier" version of PAK-FA!(How about that)

    Most people look at a Harrier type aircraft and think... how neat... a single engine in the middle with four exhaust nozzles and it can fly like a helicopter and a fixed wing aircraft.

    What they don't notice is that at the wing tips and the nose and the tail there are small puffer jets linked via piping to the main jet engine that adds lots of weight and complexity but also adds fine control which is vital.

    The Russians already developed an electronic autopilot for their Yaks for landing on ships at sea, so that shouldn't be a problem, but adding piping and developing a lift jet that can also supercruise... the only return would be the ability to make smaller carriers, and I don't think they would want smaller carriers... it would be better to have larger carriers and more planes or stores to operate longer and further away.

    Lets hope the upgrade goes without a hitch. Smile

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15490
    Points : 16197
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  GarryB on Mon Dec 12, 2011 12:55 am

    Perhaps in 2025 or so when PAk FA is in service and the Air Force decideds it needs a new smaller stealth aircraft to replace non-stealthy aircraft in service... assuming the PAK FA is a success they might want a strike version of PAK FA similar to the Su-34 to the Su-35, to replace the Su-34s in service, and also a new aircraft to replace the Mig-29s and all the various Flanker variants as a numbers fighter but with stealth capability... it might be worth looking at a VSTOL version... by then there will be plenty of evidence and experience from the F-35 II attempts to decide what choices to take or even if it is a path worth taking.

    On paper the Harrier being able to take off from any supermarket carpark or open field sounded nice, but in practise it needed a PSP airfield (ie pierced steel planking) to stop the engines sucking up grass and dirt and blowing the engine. The metal sheets that looked like steel mesh reflected radar and were difficult to hide, and of course all the fuel and ammo and support equipment made the improvised airfield pretty obvious anyway.

    Pretty good as a defensive aircraft where its lack of range and low speed didn't matter much, but would have had serious problems against modern fighters. The Sea Harrier had an excellent radar but until it got AMRAAM it would have been in trouble against Mig-23s and Mig-29s because of their BVR missile capability... Ironically it was the R-24T and R-27T and R-27ET that were the real threat as IR guided missiles are most effective when the engine nozzle of the target is visible and on a Harrier the exhaust nozzles are visible from a very wide range of angles including from the front.

    VSTOL needs a breakthrough... imagine a V-44 variant (I like it because it looks like a more balanced design) but make the wingtip engines much bigger and redesign the large blades so that their shaft can be stopped and folded back.

    Basically the aircraft will have four turboprop engines that spin enormous blades like helicopter blades... except unlike the V-22 they will be more like helicopter blades. Once the aircraft has climbed to a safe height the entire wings are rotated forward to accelerate and the aircraft will transition from being held aloft by rotor blades to being pushed forward by rotor blades and being held aloft by wings.

    The jet engine drive shafts that spin the blades are then disengaged two at a time... the blades feathered (ie turned into the wind so they stop spinning and minimise the drag they generate) and then fold back into the outer engine nacelle.

    The shaft to the propellers is disengaged but the engine continues running and changes into turbofan mode from turboprop mode, so now instead of a jet engine turning a rotor for thrust, it now uses exhaust thrust to propel the aircraft... the front rotors are then stopped and retracted.

    The aircraft can land vertically near the front line almost anywhere, or conventionally on a runway. With a sealed body it could even land in water.

    Sorry OT. Embarassed

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15490
    Points : 16197
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  GarryB on Mon Dec 12, 2011 10:30 am

    According to this article:

    http://lenta.ru/news/2011/12/12/antey/

    The Oscar class vessels will have their Granits replaced one for one by Onyx, so instead of being loaded with 24 Granits, they will carry 24 Onyx missiles.

    Why is that important?

    Onyx has no land attack capability, unlike the Brahmos, so with Onyx loaded these subs are clearly retaining their anti ship mission, and with the two Kirov class vessels likely being refitted with Onyx, it seems the Granit will be retired and Onyx will enter service in significant numbers to replace it.

    From the look of the article it seems the Onyx can be fitted directly into the Granit launch tubes as there was no mention of UKSK launchers being fitted.

    With the Kirov class upgrade however it usually mentions Oniks and Klub, which means UKSK launchers (80 tubes or 10 launcher bins of 8 tubes each has been mentioned).

    TheArmenian
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1523
    Points : 1686
    Join date : 2011-09-14

    Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  TheArmenian on Mon Dec 12, 2011 4:27 pm

    GarryB wrote:According to this article:

    http://lenta.ru/news/2011/12/12/antey/

    The Oscar class vessels will have their Granits replaced one for one by Onyx, so instead of being loaded with 24 Granits, they will carry 24 Onyx missiles.

    I think the Granit launchers will be replaced by UKSKs. Each UKSK can hold 3 or 4 missile depending on who you believe. In addition the inclined Granit launchers occupy more space than the vertically stowed UKSKs. 28 or 30 or even 32 UKSKs can take the place of 24 Granit launchers. A real multiplication of firepower.

    Onyx has no land attack capability, unlike the Brahmos

    Says who? Can you provide a manufacturers statement or specifications sheet?

    the two Kirov class vessels likely being refitted with Onyx

    That is now a certainty (Unless the refit is suddenly cancelled). Both Onyx and Kalibr will be in the UKSKs of the refitted Kirovs and IMHO in the modernized Oscars.

    it seems the Granit will be retired and Onyx will enter service in significant numbers to replace it.
    Granit production has ceased a while ago. The existing stocks will last for a while. They will be replaced by Onyx, Kalibr and maybe other unknown designs (including a possible naval version of Kh-101/102).

    From the look of the article it seems the Onyx can be fitted directly into the Granit launch tubes as there was no mention of UKSK launchers being fitted.

    No mention of UKSKs does not mean they won't be there.
    The slimmer Onyx can definitly be made to fit in a larger Granit launcher. That would be a very easy and inexpensive undertaking. However that would decrease the firepower of the Oscars because Onyx's warhead is smaller. Opting for UKSKs (like the Kirov refit) is more costly but, as mentioned earlier, it will multiply the firepower of the subs. That is the more cost effective thing to do.

    With the Kirov class upgrade however it usually mentions Oniks and Klub, which means UKSK launchers.
    Yes. Isn't it logical that they do to do Oscars the same thing they do to the Kirovs?







    TheArmenian
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1523
    Points : 1686
    Join date : 2011-09-14

    Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  TheArmenian on Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:12 pm

    From: http://www.ria.ru/defense_safety/20111212/514712329.html

    Quick on-line translation:

    APL 949 they will re-arm to the cruise missiles of "Oniks" and "Kalibr"

    To add the commentary 09:11 12/12/2011 Moscow, Dec 11 - RIA of the news.
    The nuclear-powered submarines (APL) of project 949, the analogs of that been killed in 2000 of "Kursk" , they will re-arm to the missile complexes of "Oniks" and " Kalibr" , reported RIA of the news on Monday the high-ranking representative of Russian OPK. At present these APL are armed by the cruise missiles of "Granit". " Until today TSKB Rubin protects engineering design, whose development, connected with the repair and the modernization APL 949, is completed. These APL will re-arm to the cruise missiles of "Oniks" and "Kalibr" , the collocutor of agency said. In this case he emphasized that for designers it was possible to place rockets in the same containers, in which are located the rockets of "Granit" , moreover without the alteration of housing, and even with an increase in the ammunition. Repair and modernization they will carry out the plant of " [Zvezdochka]" ([Severodvinsk]) in the European part of Russia, and in the Far East - plant of " [Zvezda]".

    The part I bolded is somehow contradictory. How can you increase the ammunition load if you don't do alterations to the housing?

    runaway
    Master Sergeant
    Master Sergeant

    Posts : 351
    Points : 372
    Join date : 2010-11-12
    Location : Sweden

    Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  runaway on Mon Dec 12, 2011 10:55 pm

    TheArmenian wrote:moreover without the alteration of housing, and even with an increase in the ammunition. Repair and modernization they will carry out the plant of " [Zvezdochka]" ([Severodvinsk]) in the European part of Russia, and in the Far East - plant of " [Zvezda]".

    The part I bolded is somehow contradictory. How can you increase the ammunition load if you don't do alterations to the housing?

    Good thinking, i reacted to that too. Maybe they can stack them 2 for 1? But that would mean smaller missiles, smaller warheads, less range. So whats the gain?

    Like Gary said, a land attack capable missile would be a real advantage for different mission capabilities.

    But its a good thing they aims to standartize the missile load for large combatans, like Anteys and Orlans.
    And in the relative near future, i guess the Atlants will join the family.


    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15490
    Points : 16197
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  GarryB on Tue Dec 13, 2011 12:32 am

    I think the Granit launchers will be replaced by UKSKs. Each UKSK can hold 3 or 4 missile depending on who you believe. In addition the inclined Granit launchers occupy more space than the vertically stowed UKSKs. 28 or 30 or even 32 UKSKs can take the place of 24 Granit launchers. A real multiplication of firepower.

    I would love to see the UKSK replace the existing launch mountings as it not only would increase missile capacity, but also it would be standard with systems fitted to other vessels in the fleet... sub and ship based.

    The problem is that UKSK are vertical tubes while the existing launchers are inclined, so it is not a case of popping out the old and dropping in the new.

    Earlier Oniks launchers were also inclined but because the Oniks is a similar length, it is much slimmer and lighter than the Granit, I think from memory it held something like 3 Oniks in each launcher to one Granit launcher that held two missiles, so if they dropped those in, they might not have the flexibility of the UKSK, but they should be able to carry rather more missiles per boat.... and the conversion will be much simpler and cheaper.

    Remember all their future ships and subs will likely have at least one set of UKSK VLS tubes, so there is not going to be a shortage of cruise missile platforms.

    Says who? Can you provide a manufacturers statement or specifications sheet?

    Ummmm... why do you think the Indian Navy wanted to develop the Brahmos? The Granit had no land attack capability either, because it was designed for one purpose only... sinking carriers and ships within the protection of a carrier group... and the parallel Vulkan and Moskit, and the replacement for Moskit (Onyx) and the export version of the replacement for Moskit (Yakhont) were anti ship missiles.

    The current model Oniks might have benefitted from improved electronics and propulsion via the development of Brahmos... it is not caught in some tie stasis field that prevents its continual improvement, but the missile as designed was an anti ship missile with no land attack capability. No doubt they have integrated GLONASS and the latest models might have some ground attack capability, but the original did not and was not intended for that.

    The UKSK allows the use of Brahmos and Klub for land attack if needed so there is little obvious point in spending money to enable the Onix to do something they don't really plan to use it for.

    That is now a certainty (Unless the refit is suddenly cancelled). Both Onyx and Kalibr will be in the UKSKs of the refitted Kirovs and IMHO in the modernized Oscars.

    Not sure about the Oscars... from what I have read they only want to implement the minimal changes to the Oscars, so they might use older launch tubes for the Onix/yakhont, which were also inclined.

    Granit production has ceased a while ago. The existing stocks will last for a while. They will be replaced by Onyx, Kalibr and maybe other unknown designs (including a possible naval version of Kh-101/102).

    They will likely use Granits as targets for naval and perhaps even land based air defence force practise.
    Navy spokesmen have already mentioned that an unnamed 5,500km range cruise missile is compatible with the UKSK launcher in Russian service... which can only be the Kh-101/102.

    No mention of UKSKs does not mean they won't be there.
    The slimmer Onyx can definitly be made to fit in a larger Granit launcher. That would be a very easy and inexpensive undertaking. However that would decrease the firepower of the Oscars because Onyx's warhead is smaller. Opting for UKSKs (like the Kirov refit) is more costly but, as mentioned earlier, it will multiply the firepower of the subs. That is the more cost effective thing to do.

    The problem... again is that the UKSK tubes are vertical and are normally added to a sub by the addition of a section to the existing sub design rather than installed either side of the pressure hull in the external hull like the Granits were in the Oscars.
    Using the old Oniks launchers is not actually a bad thing as each launcher could carry 3 missiles, while the old Granit launchers were twin launchers, so rather than holding 24 missiles in 12 launchers, with the old Oniks launchers an upgraded Oscar should be able to carry 36 Oniks missiles in 12 launchers... and by 2020 they will likely be replaced by missiles flying with scramjet propulsion at mach 7-8 with even better performance.

    Yes. Isn't it logical that they do to do Oscars the same thing they do to the Kirovs?

    Not really. Oscars might support a carrier group, but their primary role is anti enemy carrier group, for which Klubs would not be much use... The additional cost of installing UKSK launchers is not really worth it to add anti sub capability and land attack capability. With some work they could probably make the old Oniks inclined launchers compatible with the supersonic anti ship Klub which could be interesting, but rather than hunting US carrier groups, the Modern Russian Fleet for the next 10-20 years will be more focused on defending its own carrier groups and its strategic missile subs.

    New vessels entering service with UKSK bins should be able to handle any requirement to attack terrorist bases on enemy territory.

    The part I bolded is somehow contradictory. How can you increase the ammunition load if you don't do alterations to the housing?

    The current housing holds Granit launchers that hold two missiles each. There are 12 on each Oscar for 24 missiles. Replacing those with old inclined Oniks launchers able to hold 3 slimmer missiles (like Oniks/Yakhont/Brahmos, or Kalibre/Klub), would be cheaper and simpler than redesigning it to take UKSK launchers that are vertical.

    Good thinking, i reacted to that too. Maybe they can stack them 2 for 1? But that would mean smaller missiles, smaller warheads, less range. So whats the gain?

    The gain is the replacement of a 1970s technology missile that is no longer in production with a 1990s technology missile that is ready for full production and is widely used throughout the Russian fleet.

    Previously the Kirovs, the Kuznetsov, and the Oscars were the carriers of the Granit missile. Now everything from their corvettes, through frigates, destroyers, cruisers, and all their conventional an nuclear attack and missile subs can carry the same standard missile... and in a few years that new missile will fly more than twice as fast.

    In many ways it combines the widespread standardised use of Harpoon, with the power and brute force of the old big supersonic Soviet missiles.


    Mindstorm
    Captain
    Captain

    Posts : 737
    Points : 920
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  Mindstorm on Tue Dec 13, 2011 12:49 am

    The part I bolded is somehow contradictory. How can you increase the ammunition load if you don't do alterations to the housing?

    and

    Good thinking, i reacted to that too. Maybe they can stack them 2 for 1?



    Probably a look to the layout of an SM-315 launcher (if that is the solution adopted) could aid at disperse those doubts.






    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15490
    Points : 16197
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  GarryB on Tue Dec 13, 2011 2:00 am

    Good post Mindstorm... it pretty clearly shows the problems of replacing the existing Granit launchers that look a lot like the launchers in your picture, though they only hold 2 Granits per tube, while these launchers hold 3 missiles per tube.

    The UKSK launchers, being vertical simply wont fit mounted vertically:



    As you can see under the deck the standard 8 tube launch module of the UKSK consists of two large launch tubes each holding 4 missiles of a variety of types... as far as i can tell including:

    Oniks, Yakhont, Brahmos, the Klub/Kalibr family of land attack cruise missiles, anti ship cruise missiles (including subsonic and supersonic versions) and also anti sub ballistic rocket propelled torpedoes (fired at mach 1.5 to a range of 40-50km depending on the model where the torpedoes enter the water and start searching for sub targets). They are also compatible with the Kh-101 and Kh-102 long range (5,500km) land attack cruise missiles.

    Also BTW, I found this:

    http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/152x2.htm

    Not a new article, but shows the guns fire separately rather than simultaneously.

    And also this:

    The Russians have covered all of the bases, developing modern, fast-firing automatic guns in 76mm (AK-176M: L/59 calibre, 120 rpm RoF), 100mm (AK-100: L/59, 60 rpm) and 130mm (AK-130: L/54, 84 rpm for twin mounting) calibres, but current production is focused on the 100mm A190(E). This weighs about the same as the older 76mm gun but claimed range and accuracy are doubled and lethality nearly so. Compared with the AK-100, it offers an increase in rate of fire to 80 rpm and three times the accuracy. It is also available with guided and rocket-assisted long-range shells.

    and

    The latest Russian development is the 130mm A192M(E), a single barrel mounting which, compared with the AK-130, is only one-third of the weight. It has a reduced rate of fire (optimised for anti-ship and shore bombardment) and stealth characteristics. In addition, long range guided projectiles are being developed for this weapon and the AK-130.

    It was discovered late in 2006 that Russia has developed a new 152mm gun, with two barrels, vertically stacked. This gun has initially been developed for an army SPG, and in this form has a 50-round automatic launcher (the turret is unmanned) and can fire at about 15-18 rpm. There was also a proposed naval version, possibly intended as a replacement for the AK-130. It was being developed by Arsenal, and used a 'stealth' cupola. Range with existing ammunition was stated to be about 50 km, but NIIP was developing a new round capable of up to 70 km. These status of these guns is unclear. Illustrations of the army gun are HERE.

    Put all of these developments together and it is clearly technically feasible to design shells which can home in on their targets, be they ships, aircraft or missiles, as well as hit known fixed targets with precision. This has two implications for gun design. First, rate of fire is no longer so important as the kill probability of each shell will be many times higher. Secondly, if so much expensive electronics is going to be packaged into each shell, then the best value is obtained by making the shell as large as possible.

    From:

    http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/MCG.html

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15490
    Points : 16197
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  GarryB on Tue Dec 13, 2011 5:12 am

    Note the unmanned turret for the Coalition makes sense as the Armata will likely have an unmanned turret and the crew will be in the forward hull under the heaviest armour.

    Right now there are a few upgrades for the standard 152mm MSTA with all new electronics and communications/navigation equipment and of course a battle management system to tie it in with the rest of the net centric force.

    The current MSTA is based on the T-80 chassis so the first changes that need to be made are changes in electronics to make them net centric. The next change will be a shift to the Armata chassis, so the change to longer barrel guns of the coalition system can be delayed a bit to save money.

    While it is being delayed they will likely change the turret design to reduce its size for the Army to make it compatible with air transport resources as the current turret includes dual belt feeds to two main guns with automated ammo racks in an unmanned turret.
    By removing one gun and two ammo belt feeds the height of the turret should be significantly reduced for teh land based model.

    For the Naval model stealth shaping should enable the original twin gun layout be kept, which should mean a relatively high rate of fire and with twin dual feed enable switching between ammo types in a simple and quick manner.

    Likely new longer barrel guns could be fitted to new build MSTAs and the longer range and guided ammo can also be introduced to improve performance, but of course a net centric structure and electronics will make the Glonass guided rounds much more effective and efficient.

    I suspect the new longer range rounds will be more expensive, but even standard rounds with new GLONASS electronic fuse attachments should raise the level of performance by an enormous amount.

    Obviously being able to hit the target with the first shot means a lot less rounds fired and more moving than shooting as less rounds will be required per target... more targets should be able to be engaged in the same volley.

    TheArmenian
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1523
    Points : 1686
    Join date : 2011-09-14

    Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  TheArmenian on Tue Dec 13, 2011 4:28 pm

    Remember the old Soviet YANKEE class SSBNs converted to SSGNs (the project 667M Andromeda and Project 667AT Grusha).
    The Soviets went to great lengths to modify the above subs for the new role. I would not be surprised if the Russians ditch the inclined SM-225A launchers (that hold one Granit) and install vertical launch UKSKs. True, it would be the most expensive and extensive modification, but it will provide the greatest boost in firepower. If they are prpared to do it for the battlecruisers why not the Oscars?
    The SM-315 inclined launchers that hold 3 Onyx/Kalibers are the next best solution. In this case each Granit cell will be replaced by 1 SM-315 which holds a troika of missiles. So 24 x 3 = 72 missiles.

    Photo of SM-225A



    Ummmm... why do you think the Indian Navy wanted to develop the Brahmos? The Granit had no land attack capability either, because it was designed for one purpose only... sinking carriers and ships within the protection of a carrier group... and the parallel Vulkan and Moskit, and the replacement for Moskit (Onyx) and the export version of the replacement for Moskit (Yakhont) were anti ship missiles.

    The current model Oniks might have benefitted from improved electronics and propulsion via the development of Brahmos... it is not caught in some tie stasis field that prevents its continual improvement, but the missile as designed was an anti ship missile with no land attack capability. No doubt they have integrated GLONASS and the latest models might have some ground attack capability, but the original did not and was not intended for that.

    The UKSK allows the use of Brahmos and Klub for land attack if needed so there is little obvious point in spending money to enable the Onix to do something they don't really plan to use it for.

    The Brahmos is not an Indian project. It is a Russian-Indian one. Anything developped there should be automatically considered a given for the Russia only Onyx.
    OK, why have a land attack capable Onyx if you already have the Kaliber that can do that? Because the supersonic Onyx is more capable in penetrating well defended airspaces than the subsonic Kaliber. Think of it as a Naval equivalent of the Iskander.

    with the old Oniks launchers an upgraded Oscar should be able to carry 36 Oniks missiles in 12 launchers
    With the SM-315 it will be 72 missiles as i metioned earlier in this post.

    Not really. Oscars might support a carrier group, but their primary role is anti enemy carrier group, for which Klubs would not be much use...
    What makes you think so? I think that will be the Yasens job. The older/larger/less quiet Oscar's primary role will be strategic/tactical decapitating massive cruise missile launches against land targets while retaining anti-shipping capabilities as well.







    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15490
    Points : 16197
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  GarryB on Wed Dec 14, 2011 4:10 am

    The Soviets went to great lengths to modify the above subs for the new role.

    They did, but they did that to create a testbed for new designs using the new systems.

    In this case however they are prolonging the life of the Oscars by removing weapons no longer in production and replacing them with current standard weapons.

    The roles are not fundamentally changed... they will likely continue in the role of countering US carrier groups.

    The Soviets went to great lengths to modify the above subs for the new role. I would not be surprised if the Russians ditch the inclined SM-225A launchers (that hold one Granit) and install vertical launch UKSKs. True, it would be the most expensive and extensive modification, but it will provide the greatest boost in firepower.

    Would they fit vertically mounted?

    Do older Oscars need more fire power?

    The US Fleet has become more capable but are also less of a threat.

    If they are prpared to do it for the battlecruisers why not the Oscars?

    A Kirov class vessel has the potential to show the flag or operate as the core of a carrier group, for which large numbers of a range of different types of missiles would be useful.

    The Oscar is and always was simply the backbone of an attack on a US carrier group. This role has diminished somewhat, but remains and might be transferred to a capablility against Chinese carriers... or Japanese ones.

    The SM-315 inclined launchers that hold 3 Onyx/Kalibers are the next best solution. In this case each Granit cell will be replaced by 1 SM-315 which holds a troika of missiles. So 24 x 3 = 72 missiles.

    You are assuming the SM-315 takes up the same space as a single SM-225A, which is a rather dubious assumption in my opinion.

    The Brahmos is not an Indian project. It is a Russian-Indian one. Anything developped there should be automatically considered a given for the Russia only Onyx.

    Are you suggesting that the Russians shared all the technology of the Yakhont to India?

    It was more akin to the Su-30MKI program, where a Russian base item was given extended capabilities using Indian and foreign technology and solutions to meet very specific Indian needs. There was little if any technology sharing, though the Brahmos uses GLONASS for guidance in the land attack mode.

    OK, why have a land attack capable Onyx if you already have the Kaliber that can do that? Because the supersonic Onyx is more capable in penetrating well defended airspaces than the subsonic Kaliber. Think of it as a Naval equivalent of the Iskander.

    Let me put it this way... why didn't the Russian AF apply the SMT upgrade to its Mig-29s straight away... R-77 capability plus reduced support costs by 40% it would have paid for itself in less than 5 years.

    The simple reason is that the Mig-29 was a point defence interceptor, and making it multirole would have made no difference as the unit that operate it are not trained in air to ground roles.

    Why spend money making Oniks able to hit land targets when Klub can do it from 2,000km?

    With the SM-315 it will be 72 missiles as i metioned earlier in this post.

    Assuming 24 SM-315s will fit... if only 12 fit, then it is 36.

    What makes you think so? I think that will be the Yasens job.

    How many Yasens are there in service? There is a reason this upgrade is cheap and uses "existing launchers". It makes it a relatively quick and cheap conversion.

    The older/larger/less quiet Oscar's primary role will be strategic/tactical decapitating massive cruise missile launches against land targets while retaining anti-shipping capabilities as well.

    I think the quieter Yasens would be better in the role of protecting the SSBNs from enemy SSNs. The Oscars on the other hand would be much more valuable in stopping enemy carrier groups closing to strike range of Russia and launching air attacks with tactical nuclear weapons.

    Long range strikes on the US are better left to SLBMs...

    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5840
    Points : 5892
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  TR1 on Wed Dec 14, 2011 7:11 am

    I think it is pretty clear the main reason behind this sudden Granit replacement, is not a sudden realization in missile inadequacy, but something to do with missile life, exploitation future, and numbers available to maintain effective force credibility. The Anteiis are a critical component of the Russian Navy's anti-ship capability, and continue to provide immense in-theater deterrent value; them becoming toothless must have spooked the Navy, who has so far been penny pinching in regards to existing ship modernization and overhaul.

    Even if missile numbers are not increased, Kalibr will bring a much needed land attack capability that the RuNavy lacks.

    Also...there is some positive rumors on the Belgorod front Smile . And no, I don't mean they are finally scrapping it and freeing the space.

    Sponsored content

    Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  Sponsored content Today at 3:35 pm


      Current date/time is Sat Dec 10, 2016 3:35 pm