Project 22160 Bykov-class patrol ship

Tingsay wrote:

In hindsight and now with this heavier version, Russia could've saved a lot of time, money and headache had they merged this class with karakurt and the later versions of Buyan into one major class with different variants for patrol ships,corvettes/missile boats.

They can't. They are different classes. Even Karakurt is not replacement for Buyan-M. Karakurt is ocean going missile boat, while Buyan-M is special river-sea class to operate from shallow waters and in the rivers. Bykov is larger patrol corvette for long endurance in the ocean. No need to give more armament on them as they already have Steregushy/Gremyashchy corvettes in that class. More armament mean shorter endurance time.

Why won't the Russians equip its 57mm gun with gun launched bulat missiles?

limb wrote:Why won't the Russians equip its 57mm gun with gun launched boat missiles?

What ?

That 57mm gun is more than good enough to deal with any sea pirate. No need to waste expensive missiles on them.

Another problem with that suggestion is that Bulat is likely much bigger calibre than 57mm so firing them from a 57mm gun would be impossible.

Bulat is a scaled down Kornet, but I don't think it is scaled down to 57mm calibre.

Bulat is smaller than Kornet, and 8 Bulat missiles fit in the four launcher tube system for the Kornet, but I not seen any detailed information about the Bulat to suggest its actual calibre... Kornet is 152mm calibre so a half calibre missile is still going to be 70-80mm calibre.

The light Mirage class patrol boat carries the Shturm ATGM missile system with 6 Ataka missiles for use against sea and air targets, so using ATGMs on ships is not unheard of.

Soviet and Russian ATGMs tend to be relatively cheap and accurate... Ataka has a range of about 6km and a flight speed of about 450m/s which makes it a potent missile... it has been popular on Hind helicopters for quite some time as a weapon for hitting point targets out at reasonable distances, though these days it has been replaced by the Khrisantema.

IMDS 2021 showcased an already known variant of 22160 often mentioned in brochures, but I believe a better job can be done. I have many times mentioned the need for a mass produced, good, long range corvette/patrol asset for the Russian Navy based on the 22160 that's also properly armed. So did some rough illustration to show how it could look.


The above one is with decent AD layout, but misses out completely on the 8-cell configuration seen on 22500 (below). This is basically b'coz the hanger is fused into the superstructure and takes valuable space inside. They likely did not consider any "major" changes to the superstructure as they are still struck with the option of container based 8-cell configuration at the stern.
I have always wanted to remove these two stuffs and integrate the features of 22160 & 22500 into a single purposeful unit.


There are certain things that I have strong dislike for in the 22160 proposal (& the wasteful 20386). One of them is the container based silos.

I personally believe, any missile launches should be a one step process once everything is cleared. Open the hatch and Zooom!
Not a tedious 3-4 step process which involve helo deck clearing, opening the flight deck, opening the container, raising the silos to launch position to FINALLY fire the missile.
Its ok to utilize this method for ships which are not dedicated combat ships like landing/transport ships, but an utterly wasteful and ridiculous configuration for combat ships.


There is nothing groundbreaking in the configuration that I have illustrated below.
All the configuration was already illustrated in various models/brochures of 22160. I did the work of integrating it into a single unit.
For example - 8-cell configuration.
There was no chance for 8-cell to be configured transversely at the bow, as the lower decks doesn't have required beam (shorter AD silos can be accommodated). So they always showcased the 8-cell unit configured along the axis.

The main changes I made are -
1) pushed out the hanger completely from the superstructure to integrate a transverse 8-cell unit like 22500
2) done away completely with containerized launchers at the stern.

Dima wrote:

Is there any info available that details the current use of the hull space that you're allocating to VLS?  Crew accomodation? Galley? Provisions storage? Equipment room? I think its fair to say that its not a big empty void that is just waiting for a shiny pair of missile bins to be slipped in and bolted down. Stability considerations might also be important.

Big_Gazza wrote:...Is there any info available that details the current use of the hull space that you're allocating to VLS?  Crew accomodation? Galley? Provisions storage? Equipment room? I think its fair to say that its not a big empty void that is just waiting for a shiny pair of missile bins to be slipped in and bolted down.  Stability considerations might also be important.

Currently its accommodation for marines, Navy requested that it be installed instead of originally planned AA system

Also UKSK can't be installed there, it can only fit AA VLS

Reminder as always that this is a patrol vessel not a warship

Big_Gazza wrote:Is there any info available that details the current use of the hull space that you're allocating to VLS?  Crew accomodation? Galley? Provisions storage? Equipment room? I think its fair to say that its not a big empty void that is just waiting for a shiny pair of missile bins to be slipped in and bolted down.  Stability considerations might also be important.

I took that specific sectional self explanatory view from the brochure so as to avoid explaining much.
Green - various posts
Yellow - crew & other public spaces like galley..
Red - weapons/equipment related
I don't have any specific details regarding those shown in the brochure. So the readjustments of green/yellow was based on my thoughts.

But, anyone with careful observation will be able to get that the hanger fused into the superstructure is taking a lot of usable space due to which those spaces found residence further ahead.

Also, I don't know if you were actually serious when you asked about the crew, public & other spaces.
Are you saying that you never saw or came across the below illustration of 22160 with 16 x 9M96E?
What happened to those posts, crew and public spaces when those 16 cells was installed there?
Where did they go?
Are the internals so tight that there is hardly any space to rearrange/maneuver?


I just want to repeat one again that, what I illustrated in the above is nothing ground breaking and is a rough one based on the various models/CG/sketches of the 22160 and 22500 made available all these years.

Or lets say, I dug at the same "empty" spaces where the designers had already dug, to display their various configurations, to bolt down the shiny pair of missile bins.

Actually 20160 could be better solution then 22800. More displacement, more weaponry and range if in corvette "edition".


BTW does anybody know what cells are on stern? Redut ones?

I addressed that in
https://www.russiadefence.net/t6657p575-project-22160-bykov-class-patrol-ship#328530
and
https://www.russiadefence.net/t6657p575-project-22160-bykov-class-patrol-ship#330650

In that model there are 24 cells so would presumably be the proposed all Redut version.

While its attractive to theorise about filling-out the 22160 & turn it into a proper warship (and I've certainly indulged in it), I think that hull design has issues with extra mass.
Once you're pushing 2000ton there is already a proper warship in that weight-class in production & its got proper ASW capability -> makes more sense to just build more 20380/5s IMO.

BTW does anybody know what cells are on stern? Redut ones?

Based on their height they look like UKSK launch tubes... two four tube launchers...

In other words the standard UKSK split in half.

This would be useful for carrying Ovtet anti sub ballistic rocket delivered torpedoes, but if they are UKSK-M then they could each carry four 9M96 missiles as well which would make it quite flexible.

GunshipDemocracy wrote:Actually 20160 could be better solution then 22800. More displacement, more weaponry and range if in corvette "edition".
.....
https://2021.f.a0z.ru/09/04-10009757-22160-mvms-2021-15.jpg

Like hoom said we've been over this before

It's OPV built according to civilian standards

It can support warships in full on war by hauling some extra missiles but it's simply not a full combat vessel

It's like wanting to turn APC into a tank by putting​ 120mm gun on it

It will look a like a tank but it will definitely not be a tank in addition to being almost completely useless

PapaDragon wrote:

It's OPV built according to civilian standards
It can support warships in full on war by hauling some extra missiles but it's simply not a full combat vessel

so what are civilian standards with regards to a  ship hull for you precisely? better range, autonomy, seaworthiness  and lower price ?
So you suggest


Or newer design?

GarryB wrote:

BTW does anybody know what cells are on stern? Redut ones?

Based on their height they look like UKSK launch tubes... two four tube launchers...

In other words the standard UKSK split in half.

This would be useful for carrying Ovtet anti sub ballistic rocket delivered torpedoes, but if they are UKSK-M then they could each carry four 9M96 missiles as well which would make it quite flexible.

No the first VLS (8 cells?) is for AAD missiles. For otvet they would need also sonars. I hope it will be added in combat edition.

It has Paket-nk tubes so it has a sonar.

GunshipDemocracy wrote:so what are civilian standards with regards to a  ship hull for you precisely? better range, autonomy, seaworthiness  and lower price ?

Bykov has only one engine and civilian grade flood compartments

That's civilian

GunshipDemocracy wrote:So you suggest ?

Gremashi or Gorshkov

PapaDragon wrote:

Bykov has only one engine and civilian grade flood compartments

That's civilian

Actually all sources i could find say there are 2 Kolomna 16D49 diesels. Same engines as   on 20380 BTW. Depending on source either 4 MTU diesels  (same as installed on 20380) or diesel turbine  turbines power unit .  Only om 20380 you got 2 diesels  per shaft.  The interesting fact is that Bykov with a half of 20380 power has comparable top speed and larger range...


The difference is design definitely: 20380 is older by ~15 years.

BTW  Where id you read abut flood compartments? I didn't find anywhere such info.  

PD wrote:

GunshipDemocracy wrote:So you suggest ?

Gremashi or Gorshkov

Groshkhov costs 25bln roubles? $400m many estimations no price found


Gremiashy  cost 7-9blns ($120-150m)
https://military.wikia.org/wiki/Steregushchiy-class_corvette

For Algeria (likely with gas turbines) 3 bln ($45m) per unit


https://navalpost.com/algeria-and-russia-have-signed-an-agreement-to-acquire-four-project-22160-class-patrol-ships/#:~:text=September%2020%2C%202021-,Algeria%20and%20Russia%20have%20signed%20an%20agreement%20to,Project%2022160%2Dclass%20patrol%20ships&text=May%2025%2C%202018-,Algeria%20and%20Russia%20have%20signed%20an%20agreement%20to%20acquire%20four,total%20value%20of%20%24%20180%20million.
 

So there is where I cannot agree with you. If you add ASW and AAD stuff on 22160 you still go cheaper then 20380 and have if not better then for sure not worse ship, better sea worthy and cheaper.

No, the Bykov is not built to civilian standards. No purpose-built ship for the Navy is.

I've been in a naval hospital ship and even that is for sure not built to civilian standards either

Actually all sources i could find say there are 2 Kolomna 16D49 diesels.

Poorly worded but he means 1 engine room.
Proper military spec would separate them with waterproof bulkheads so that if one is damaged/flooded the other may be OK.

Poorly worded but he means 1 engine room.
Proper military spec would separate them with waterproof bulkheads so that if one is damaged/flooded the other may be OK.

That was one of the Russian Navies objections to the Mistral design... only one engine room...

Leaders of the Invisible: Stealth Corvettes will be upgraded

The Ministry of Defense launches a program for the renovation of Project 20380 warships

https://iz.ru/1231379/roman-kretcul-bogdan-stepovoi/lidery-nevidimykh-stels-korvety-zhdet-modernizatciia


no no this is not as incorrectly placed post. At the end of IZ article you can find interesting news:

Special attention is now being paid to protecting ships from air attacks. Izvestia has already written that the Navy is working on the parameters of a contract for the purchase of a new batch of Project 22160 Vasily Bykov patrol ships. They will have to be built according to the updated project. They will eliminate weaknesses identified during operation - including during trips to the shores of Syria and the Arctic. In particular, the ships' armament complex will be revised on them. It is possible that the ships will be equipped with a new air defense system. In total, six Bykovs are to be built by 2023.

Looks like  VLS for Redut and UKSK are going to  be added after all.  My bet is on 2 more diesels ( so there will be 4 as planned  -> top speed 30kts)


edit: of course in mock up were also 2x paket torpedo launchers






Here about Bykov using Ka-27 and future exercises with Kalibrs


https://structure.mil.ru/structure/forces/navy/news/more.htm?id=12220552@egNews

hoom wrote:

Actually all sources i could find say there are 2 Kolomna 16D49 diesels.

Poorly worded but he means 1 engine room.
Proper military spec would separate them with waterproof bulkheads so that if one is damaged/flooded the other may be OK.

This ship was designed for the Navy against Navy requirements ...