Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System

    AlfaT8
    AlfaT8

    Posts : 1806
    Points : 1801
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System - Page 6 Empty Re: Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System

    Post  AlfaT8 on Thu Jul 18, 2019 11:33 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    1) 3 kinds of missiles presented + one perspective with range 400km altitude 35km Izvestia claims it is built base of 40N6E

    Well that confirms why the area under each Redut hatch is so big... to fit the 40N6 missiles.

    Therefore it is logical that the 9M96 missiles can be loaded four to each hatch, and the smaller 9M100 can be fitted 16 to each hatch... and that is assuming they only use one layer of missiles as the much smaller 9M100 missiles might be short enough to stack in two layers...


    ????
    What??..... 2 layers.
    As far as we know this the only config.
    Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System - Page 6 Igor-sutyagin-the-opposite-of-air-power-53-1024[/quote]

    Where is the 40N6 suppose to go?
    Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System - Page 6 AdBNHxJ

    And 9m100 only has a quad config in Redut, not sure about S-300/400.
    Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System - Page 6 9M100_MAKS-2017_2_05

    Now this is all assuming Redut and the S-350 have the same dimensions.
    I found this, which if the VLS system here is Redut, then you may have room for the 48N6, but not the 40N6.
    Looking at the altitude specs of 85km, this would definitely mean that it's not the 40N6, since it's altitude is almost 200km, so an improved 48N6 would be more likely.
    Either that or this report totally wrong.

    Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System - Page 6 0axkiij

    ____
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 22095
    Points : 22639
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System - Page 6 Empty Re: Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System

    Post  GarryB on Fri Jul 19, 2019 2:12 am


    ????
    What??..... 2 layers.
    As far as we know this the only config.

    Look at your first image with the truck mounted 9M96 (the full length tubes) and the 9M100 (the short tubes).

    In your pictures showing the 9M96 missiles lying next to the full sized 40N6 missiles you can see the 40N6 is as wide as the four pack of 9M96 missiles, so if Redut can carry the 40N6 missile it must be both wide enough and long enough to fit that rather big missile.

    If Redut can fit the big long range missiles then it should be able to fit four of the 9M96 missiles in the same space because they were designed to fit into the same space... there are pictures of S-400 missiles with one large missile missing and a quad pack of 9M96 missiles in the one missiles place.

    The S-350 is not designed to carry the big 40N6 missiles as it would need to be rather longer to fit the wider and longer missiles.

    If Redut can carry the 40N6 missiles then there must be extra length space within the tube to fit those longer missiles.

    Now look at the S-350 launcher again... the 9M100 missiles are rather smaller than the 9M96 missile tubes.

    The 9M96 tubes are not half the length of the 40N6 so you could not stack them in Redut, but the 9M100 missiles might be half the length of the 40N6... we know they are a quarter the size so even with just one layer they could have 16 missiles per 40N6 tube... the question is can they fit 32 in two layers of 16 missiles.

    It is not really critical for Redut, but for bigger tubes like UKSK-M stacking might solve the problem of volume... tiny missiles are not worth carrying if you can only carry one in a huge tube... it is all about efficiency of using the tube... getting four 9M96 missiles into one tube means you can have extreme long range with one 40N6, or you can give up that extreme range... which many targets wont warrant anyway and get four shorter ranged missiles.

    In fact you could mix it up and have two 150km range missiles and two 60km range missiles... or you might even have one 150km range missile, two 60km range missiles, and four 10km range 9M100 missiles under the one Redut hatch cover...

    If the 9M100 can be stacked then you could have 8 x 10km range 9M100 missiles... which is even better.

    The UKSK-M has to carry enormous long range cruise missiles 10m long and also the S-500 which could be an enormous missile too, which means the tube is even wider than the redut tube... there is little chance of getting two or three or four 40N6 missiles in each tube, but their might be room for more 9M96s and certainly regarding length there should be room for three lots of 9M100 missiles stacked on top of each other... it is just a way of more efficiently using up space.

    Now this is all assuming Redut and the S-350 have the same dimensions.

    Look at the big tube at the back on the truck mounted S-350... that is the 9M96.

    That is the missile on Redut which has a fairing all round it because the hatch cover is enormous... and it has to be that big because each cell is designed to carry 40N6 sized missiles which your posted images above clearly show in the background is rather bigger (wider and longer) than the 9M96.
    The 9M100 is even smaller and can fit in the space of one 9M96.

    It is like the Russian dolls... the Redut launcher on the ships can take the 40N6... if you open that you can fit four 9M96 inside though there is a gap because they are rather shorter than the 40N6. If you open each 9M96 you can fit four 9M100 missiles in each.

    That means that a single Redut launcher cell (ie each hatch cover) can be loaded with one 40N6 missile, OR four 9M96 missiles, OR 16 (4x4) 9M100 missiles.

    That seems to be fact.

    What I am suggesting is that the 9M100 missiles are so much shorter than the 9M96 missiles and also the even bigger 40N6 that fit in the tube that it might be possible to stack the 9M100 missiles in two layers... so 32 missiles per tube instead of 16.

    This would be very useful for small vessels as the 9M100 practically equates to a very high performance CIWS anti missile missile.

    The latter is purely speculation on my part and I have no evidence or have seen no references to suggest I might be right regarding stacking.

    The UKSK-M would benefit enormously from stacking of different missile types as it is designed to carry a wide range of missile sizes (widths and lengths).
    Rodion_Romanovic
    Rodion_Romanovic

    Posts : 500
    Points : 500
    Join date : 2015-12-30

    Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System - Page 6 Empty Re: Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System

    Post  Rodion_Romanovic on Fri Jul 19, 2019 11:25 am

    GarryB wrote:

    ????
    What??..... 2 layers.
    As far as we know this the only config.

    Look at your first image with the truck mounted 9M96 (the full length tubes) and the 9M100 (the short tubes).

    In your pictures showing the 9M96 missiles lying next to the full sized 40N6 missiles you can see the 40N6 is as wide as the four pack of 9M96 missiles, so if Redut can carry the 40N6 missile it must be both wide enough and long enough to fit that rather big missile.

    If Redut can fit the big long range missiles then it should be able to fit four of the 9M96 missiles in the same space because they were designed to fit into the same space... there are pictures of S-400 missiles with one large missile missing and a quad pack of 9M96 missiles in the one missiles place.

    The S-350 is not designed to carry the big 40N6 missiles as it would need to be rather longer to fit the wider and longer missiles.

    If Redut can carry the 40N6 missiles then there must be extra length space within the tube to fit those longer missiles.

    Now look at the S-350 launcher again... the 9M100 missiles are rather smaller than the 9M96 missile tubes.

    The 9M96 tubes are not half the length of the 40N6 so you could not stack them in Redut, but the 9M100 missiles might be half the length of the 40N6... we know they are a quarter the size so even with just one layer they could have 16 missiles per 40N6 tube... the question is can they fit 32 in two layers of 16 missiles.

    It is not really critical for Redut, but for bigger tubes like UKSK-M stacking might solve the problem of volume... tiny missiles are not worth carrying if you can only carry one in a huge tube... it is all about efficiency of using the tube... getting four 9M96 missiles into one tube means you can have extreme long range with one 40N6, or you can give up that extreme range... which many targets wont warrant anyway and get four shorter ranged missiles.

    In fact you could mix it up and have two 150km range missiles and two 60km range missiles... or you might even have one 150km range missile, two 60km range missiles, and four 10km range 9M100 missiles under the one Redut hatch cover...

    If the 9M100 can be stacked then you could have 8 x 10km range 9M100 missiles... which is even better.

    The UKSK-M has to carry enormous long range cruise missiles 10m long and also the S-500 which could be an enormous missile too, which means the tube is even wider than the redut tube... there is little chance of getting two or three or four 40N6 missiles in each tube, but their might be room for more 9M96s and certainly regarding length there should be room for three lots of 9M100 missiles stacked on top of each other... it is just a way of more efficiently using up space.

    Now this is all assuming Redut and the S-350 have the same dimensions.

    Look at the big tube at the back on the truck mounted S-350... that is the 9M96.

    That is the missile on Redut which has a fairing all round it because the hatch cover is enormous... and it has to be that big because each cell is designed to carry 40N6 sized missiles which your posted images above clearly show in the background is rather bigger (wider and longer) than the 9M96.
    The 9M100 is even smaller and can fit in the space of one 9M96.

    It is like the Russian dolls... the Redut launcher on the ships can take the 40N6... if you open that you can fit four 9M96 inside though there is a gap because they are rather shorter than the 40N6. If you open each 9M96 you can fit four 9M100 missiles in each.

    That means that a single Redut launcher cell (ie each hatch cover) can be loaded with one 40N6 missile, OR four 9M96 missiles, OR 16 (4x4) 9M100 missiles.

    That seems to be fact.

    What I am suggesting is that the 9M100 missiles are so much shorter than the 9M96 missiles and also the even bigger 40N6 that fit in the tube that it might be possible to stack the 9M100 missiles in two layers... so 32 missiles per tube instead of 16.

    This would be very useful for small vessels as the 9M100 practically equates to a very high performance CIWS anti missile missile.

    The latter is purely speculation on my part and I have no evidence or have seen no references to suggest I might be right regarding stacking.

    The UKSK-M would benefit enormously from stacking of different missile types as it is designed to carry a wide range of missile sizes (widths and lengths).

    Hey Garry, and what do you think instead of thw idea of having smaller (and shorter) dedicated VLS cells only for the smaller missile? They should be comparable in size with the kinzhal (naval tor) VLS and they could be placed were there is not enough space for a full sized Redut cell (e.g. side of the hull or in smaller vessel).
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 22095
    Points : 22639
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System - Page 6 Empty Re: Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System

    Post  GarryB on Sat Jul 20, 2019 7:34 am

    That would be interesting, because not every vessel is going to be able to carry the UKSK-M which is the final universal missile launcher that seems to be designed to carry all their different missile types, as some of those missiles are huge.

    Personally I think a bit of flexibility is a good thing so a small SAM launcher and a small other missile launcher design together with the universal launcher that can carry anything at all.

    To be honest with the volume of missiles these vessels will be able to carry I think half the time they will be operating with half their missile tubes empty simply because that many new missiles wont be cheap.

    Perhaps that is the reasoning behind the revealed TOR launch system which appears to have the turret of the land based TOR system minus the search radar but with the tracking radar and presumably 16 ready to launch missiles and two pods behind it with two more packs of presumably 16 more missiles each... you can just bolt it on externally to any free area of deck space... the front section with the tracking radar will need to turn but the other modules with missiles could be dotted all over the ship and not need to move at all... you could even put them on civilian ships if you wanted to... takes up no space under the deck except presumably power and data cables...

    Sort of the equivalent of an external above deck quad pack of Kh-35 missiles and the appropriate cabling and software upgrades to use them... they could probably add another similar system with the later model Kh-31s with a bigger solid rocket booster to give it decent range... over time upgrading it with scramjet propulsion could make it a very potent little missile for targets that are not carriers.

    The idea of a universal launcher is brilliant, but only if you can stack missiles and utilise the full capacity of the tubes with the smaller missile designs.

    That is not to say you don't need any other weapons on their ships... I think guns and even grad type rocket launchers sill have their place.

    It would be interesting to see if they could update their artillery shells to include cloaking rounds with chaff and flare munitions that can be rapidly fired around the ship with perhaps a jamming round that could be fired away from the ship to attract anti jamming missiles away from the ship rapidly and available 24/7.
    AlfaT8
    AlfaT8

    Posts : 1806
    Points : 1801
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System - Page 6 Empty Re: Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System

    Post  AlfaT8 on Sat Jul 20, 2019 7:36 pm

    GarryB wrote:

    ????
    What??..... 2 layers.
    As far as we know this the only config.

    Look at your first image with the truck mounted 9M96 (the full length tubes) and the 9M100 (the short tubes).

    In your pictures showing the 9M96 missiles lying next to the full sized 40N6 missiles you can see the 40N6 is as wide as the four pack of 9M96 missiles, so if Redut can carry the 40N6 missile it must be both wide enough and long enough to fit that rather big missile.

    If Redut can fit the big long range missiles then it should be able to fit four of the 9M96 missiles in the same space because they were designed to fit into the same space... there are pictures of S-400 missiles with one large missile missing and a quad pack of 9M96 missiles in the one missiles place.

    The S-350 is not designed to carry the big 40N6 missiles as it would need to be rather longer to fit the wider and longer missiles.

    If Redut can carry the 40N6 missiles then there must be extra length space within the tube to fit those longer missiles.

    Now look at the S-350 launcher again... the 9M100 missiles are rather smaller than the 9M96 missile tubes.

    The 9M96 tubes are not half the length of the 40N6 so you could not stack them in Redut, but the 9M100 missiles might be half the length of the 40N6... we know they are a quarter the size so even with just one layer they could have 16 missiles per 40N6 tube... the question is can they fit 32 in two layers of 16 missiles.

    It is not really critical for Redut, but for bigger tubes like UKSK-M stacking might solve the problem of volume... tiny missiles are not worth carrying if you can only carry one in a huge tube... it is all about efficiency of using the tube... getting four 9M96 missiles into one tube means you can have extreme long range with one 40N6, or you can give up that extreme range... which many targets wont warrant anyway and get four shorter ranged missiles.

    In fact you could mix it up and have two 150km range missiles and two 60km range missiles... or you might even have one 150km range missile, two 60km range missiles, and four 10km range 9M100 missiles under the one Redut hatch cover...

    If the 9M100 can be stacked then you could have 8 x 10km range 9M100 missiles... which is even better.

    The UKSK-M has to carry enormous long range cruise missiles 10m long and also the S-500 which could be an enormous missile too, which means the tube is even wider than the redut tube... there is little chance of getting two or three or four 40N6 missiles in each tube, but their might be room for more 9M96s and certainly regarding length there should be room for three lots of 9M100 missiles stacked on top of each other... it is just a way of more efficiently using up space.

    Now this is all assuming Redut and the S-350 have the same dimensions.

    Look at the big tube at the back on the truck mounted S-350... that is the 9M96.

    That is the missile on Redut which has a fairing all round it because the hatch cover is enormous... and it has to be that big because each cell is designed to carry 40N6 sized missiles which your posted images above clearly show in the background is rather bigger (wider and longer) than the 9M96.
    The 9M100 is even smaller and can fit in the space of one 9M96.

    It is like the Russian dolls... the Redut launcher on the ships can take the 40N6... if you open that you can fit four 9M96 inside though there is a gap because they are rather shorter than the 40N6. If you open each 9M96 you can fit four 9M100 missiles in each.

    That means that a single Redut launcher cell (ie each hatch cover) can be loaded with one 40N6 missile, OR four 9M96 missiles, OR 16 (4x4) 9M100 missiles.

    That seems to be fact.

    What I am suggesting is that the 9M100 missiles are so much shorter than the 9M96 missiles and also the even bigger 40N6 that fit in the tube that it might be possible to stack the 9M100 missiles in two layers... so 32 missiles per tube instead of 16.

    This would be very useful for small vessels as the 9M100 practically equates to a very high performance CIWS anti missile missile.

    The latter is purely speculation on my part and I have no evidence or have seen no references to suggest I might be right regarding stacking.

    The UKSK-M would benefit enormously from stacking of different missile types as it is designed to carry a wide range of missile sizes (widths and lengths).

    Well first of all that is not the 40N6, it's the smaller 48N6, i couldn't find a proper pic of the 40N6, sorry.

    And i don't think so, although Redut does have some extra space, it doesn't look like it could hold a Quad config.

    Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System - Page 6 11TK6
    Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System - Page 6 9M96_MAKS-2017_2_09
    Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System - Page 6 1024px-Air_Defence_System_%22Vityaz%22_%28english_%22Knight%22%29

    Else if there was space for quad 9M96s they would have done it, and we would also see Hexa 9M100 config.
    But that's not the case here.

    As for stacked launchers, that would definitely by one hell of a technological and design improvement, but like 360 or 180 Degree IRST systems, it doesn't look like it's happening.
    It could happen, but not today.

    Sadly, i haven't been able to get a good measurements.
    But from what i found the Kalibre missiles from the UKSK has a diameter of around 0.5m and according to open source info, the 48N6 has a similar diameter.

    So for comparisons sake.

    Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System - Page 6 UKSK_Russia_VLS
    Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System - Page 6 11TK6

    Now length wise the 48N6 is 7,5m no doubt the 40N6 is closer to 8m.
    Now we know the UKSK is 9.5m, so looking it the Gorshkov where the Redut is 1 meter or so lower than the UKSK, stands to reason that it might be possible, but Diameter wise it doesn't add up, as the pics above show.
    Above all, if they have the space for Quad 9M98s, then they would have done it.

    After looking at the hatches of the UKSK and Redut on the Gorshk, they look similar, but i can't get anything accurate on the Redut.

    Strange, info about the UKSK and Shtil-1 are easy to find, but i can't find anything on Redut.

    Overall, it's a nice idea, but i just don't see it yet, maybe when we know more about the Redut.
    avatar
    hoom

    Posts : 1986
    Points : 1976
    Join date : 2016-05-06

    Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System - Page 6 Empty Re: Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System

    Post  hoom on Sun Jul 21, 2019 3:11 am

    Logically it looks like they should be able to quad-pack the 9M96 in Redut which also should mean hexa-pack 9M100.

    But having been in service for 8 years already on first production 20380, there is no evidence of it actually being a thing, no public statement or rumors that its a possible or upcoming upgrade.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 22095
    Points : 22639
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System - Page 6 Empty Re: Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System

    Post  GarryB on Sun Jul 21, 2019 3:48 am


    And i don't think so, although Redut does have some extra space, it doesn't look like it could hold a Quad config.

    Ignore the lip, and look at the actual hole the missile actually fits inside... you could easily fit four in that space.

    This is the picture to look at because this picture shows the 9M96 launch tubes right next to the launch tube of the big S-400 missiles:

    Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System - Page 6 14857210

    As you can see the four tubes of the 9M96 are designed to fit into the space of the bigger missile tube so that the launcher that carried four big tubes as normal could replace each large missile with a quad pack of smaller missiles... the whole idea behind the 9M96 was to replace earlier S-300 missiles that are the same size as the big S-400 missiles with a weapon with better performance (more modern and more capable) than the old missiles but could be loaded in greater numbers to help deal with larger attacks, and the 9M96 was ideal... the 150km range missile of the time easily exceeded the range performance of the 90km range early S-300s, and the smaller lighter 40km range missiles were more efficient against lower flying targets that wouldn't be detected at much greater ranges anyway.

    The small missiles in the picture above are the big missiles on the S-350 system on the truck and the naval Redut system.

    They have stated that the Redut system is compatible with the 400km range 40N6... which equates to the bigger missiles above... if they don't fit then how can they be compatible?

    If they do fit then looking at the image above a quad pack of the 9M96 should also fit...

    Else if there was space for quad 9M96s they would have done it, and we would also see Hexa 9M100 config.
    But that's not the case here.

    Why?

    They are just testing the system and design.

    The obvious question then becomes if the tube can only fit one 400km range missile or one 60km or 150km range missile, why would they ever carry the smaller missiles?

    But from what i found the Kalibre missiles from the UKSK has a diameter of around 0.5m and according to open source info, the 48N6 has a similar diameter.

    UKSK launches Calibres and Onyx/Yakhont/Brahmos, the UKSK tubes are wider than Redut and Rif.

    Above all, if they have the space for Quad 9M98s, then they would have done it.

    For the same reason the Ansat attack helicopter variant has 8 shot 80mm rocket pods and 12.7mm HMG fixed guns whereas bigger helicopters have 30mm cannons and 20 shot 80mm rocket pods.

    These are corvettes and Frigates... they are only testing them right now... later on they could give them their full armament and then the west will sht itself when it works out how many missiles the bigger ships will be carrying...
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 22095
    Points : 22639
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System - Page 6 Empty Re: Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System

    Post  GarryB on Sun Jul 21, 2019 3:56 am

    Compare:

    Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System - Page 6 Igor-sutyagin-the-opposite-of-air-power-53-1024

    with

    Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System - Page 6 14857211

    You can see the big missiles in the top image of the S-350 are the small missiles in the lower image of the S-400, so the tiny missiles in the S-350 should fit into the space of one of the smaller missiles on the S-400...

    Look at the lower image... the base is the same size and shape of the bases for the larger missiles and the base gets narrower as it goes up to where the quad missiles are located so the quad 9M96 pack is actually slightly narrower than the missile tube for the bigger missiles... which should make them fit even better if the big missile tube fits and they state it does because they have said the 400km and 250km range large missiles can fit in Redut.

    BTW I have just noticed that that image with the truck mounted S-350 is wrong, it states the big 9M96 missile is the big tube and the smaller tubes are the 9M100 and also the small 9M96 missile.

    This is wrong.

    The S-350 can carry either 12 9M96 missiles big or small, so both missiles are the big tubes, or it can carry 48 9M100 missiles which are the small quad packs that fit into the space of one of the bigger tubes. You can have combinations where the 9M100 is in multiples of four... so you can have 6 9M96 missiles and 6 x 4 = 24 9M100s for instance.
    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 3916
    Points : 3906
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System - Page 6 Empty Re: Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System

    Post  Isos on Sun Jul 21, 2019 9:30 am

    They have stated that the Redut system is compatible with the 400km range 40N6... which equates to the bigger missiles above... if they don't fit then how can they be compatible?

    If they do fit then looking at the image above a quad pack of the 9M96 should also fit...

    They said they will develop a missile with 400km range for redut.

    Redut was made for 9M96. There is no official data saying it can carry bigger ones. That's why they will replace it with uksk-m.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 22095
    Points : 22639
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System - Page 6 Empty Re: Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System

    Post  GarryB on Sun Jul 21, 2019 1:18 pm

    They said they will develop a missile with 400km range for redut.

    Yeah, not a brand new one... one that is related to S-400 and S-500 missiles...

    https://sputniknews.com/military/201703121051499457-russia-advanced-guided-missile/

    For Corvettes and Frigates the focus is defending the ship with their SAMs, but for larger ships like Destroyers and Cruisers they also have the requirement of area defence... defending ships operating with them, for which extra range is desirable as they have a bigger radar set and more resources like helicopters to extend their view to engage such long range targets.

    The system is called Polliment Redut and it is a unified SAM system intended to be used on small ships right up to big ones.

    The ones they have put on corvettes and frigates wont be different from the ones they put on cruisers and destroyers... and indeed aircraft carriers and cruisers that are created new or upgraded.

    Redut was made for 9M96.

    Well the evidence shows the opposite of that statement... the hatch cover size compared with the size of the tube for the 9M96 missile clearly shows the hatch is enormous and the launch tube is tiny... they could literally have made the launch tube hatch a quarter its size if they wanted to...

    There is no official data saying it can carry bigger ones. That's why they will replace it with uksk-m.

    UKSK-Ms might be universal missile launchers carrying all their missiles within them, but they wont be able to fit any on their corvettes or frigates because they are too deep...

    If they are only going to put 9M96 missiles in them then they can make them quite shallow and put them in a lot of places the UKSK-M or standard Redut would never fit, yet there is room for smaller missiles....
    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 3916
    Points : 3906
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System - Page 6 Empty Re: Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System

    Post  Isos on Sun Jul 21, 2019 1:44 pm


    Well the evidence shows the opposite of that statement... the hatch cover size compared with the size of the tube for the 9M96 missile clearly shows the hatch is enormous and the launch tube is tiny... they could literally have made the launch tube hatch a quarter its size if they wanted to...


    If they are only going to put 9M96 missiles in them then they can make them quite shallow and put them in a lot of places the UKSK-M or standard Redut would never fit, yet there is room for smaller missiles....

    48N6 is 7.5m long. It can't fit in redut VLS. The uksk on gorshkov is above redut and it was made for the long missiles like kalibr or oniks which are more comparable to 48n6 in size than 9M96 versions are. There is no way they coukd put a 48N6 in those redut cells.

    Hatch size doesn't prove anything if you don't know the deapth of the redut VLS.

    40N6 will be even longer.

    Redut carries only the 9M96 for now.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 22095
    Points : 22639
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System - Page 6 Empty Re: Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System

    Post  GarryB on Sun Jul 21, 2019 2:19 pm

    48N6 is 7.5m long. It can't fit in redut VLS.

    Actually the 48N6E (Naval Rif-M) is in a 7.8m long cannister that has a 1m diameter.

    How deep is the Redut launch system on any given ship?

    The uksk on gorshkov is above redut and it was made for the long missiles like kalibr or oniks which are more comparable to 48n6 in size than 9M96 versions are. There is no way they coukd put a 48N6 in those redut cells.

    UKSK is 9.6 metres deep. How deep does the UKSK or the redut go on any ship... do you know?

    Its position gives an idea but no certainty... and they have said they are developing 400km range missiles for the Redut system...

    Are they going to go for a two stage 9M96 and even if they were would it be shorter than a 40N6?

    Hatch size doesn't prove anything if you don't know the deapth of the redut VLS.

    A hatch size that is enormous compared with the missile that seems to be covered by that hatch suggests the system was designed to allow larger missiles to be used as well as the ones seen.


    40N6 will be even longer.

    Why would it be longer?

    The new 9M96 missiles outrange the old S-300 missiles by quite a margin and they are much much smaller, so logically putting the same propellent from the 9M96 into the older larger S-300 missiles should result in a significant boost in range and performance on its own without much smaller and lighter electronics and servo motors and of course a smaller warhead because of the higher accuracy guidance...

    Redut carries only the 9M96 for now.

    For now that seems to be accurate, but then for now the Russian Army does not have Pine missiles in service, and nor does it have S-500 missiles in service, but that is about to change too shortly.
    Rodion_Romanovic
    Rodion_Romanovic

    Posts : 500
    Points : 500
    Join date : 2015-12-30

    Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System - Page 6 Empty Re: Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System

    Post  Rodion_Romanovic on Sun Jul 21, 2019 3:13 pm

    Isos wrote:

    Well the evidence shows the opposite of that statement... the hatch cover size compared with the size of the tube for the 9M96 missile clearly shows the hatch is enormous and the launch tube is tiny... they could literally have made the launch tube hatch a quarter its size if they wanted to...


    If they are only going to put 9M96 missiles in them then they can make them quite shallow and put them in a lot of places the UKSK-M or standard Redut would never fit, yet there is room for smaller missiles....

    48N6 is 7.5m long. It can't fit in redut VLS. The uksk on gorshkov is above redut and it was made for the long missiles like kalibr or oniks which are more comparable to 48n6 in size than 9M96 versions are. There is no way they coukd put a 48N6 in those redut cells.

    Hatch size doesn't prove anything if you don't know the deapth of the redut VLS.

    40N6 will be even longer.

    Redut carries only the 9M96 for now.
    that is the problem. It is made for 9M96, and probably there is not space for 4 of them quad packed (and there instead a lot of place "wasted" when loaded with only one 9M96 (or 4 quad packed 9M100). with space wasted I mean that a UKSK with a calibr or Onyx looks more efficiently loaded.

    I do not know if the redut cell would be large enough to fit a dedicated long range missile derived from the 48N6 or 40N6, but those cell in gorshkov are probably not long enough (the 120km range 9M96E2 missiles are 5.65m long).

    I would prefer, if possible, to reduce the size of the redut cells to fit tighly around the 9M96 missile, allowing more cells to be fit in the same space. (Having so maybe 40 or 48 redut cells instead of 32 in admiral Gorshkov frigates)

    The 40N6 and 48N6 missiles could be instead put in the UKSK-M cells.


    I suggested also dedicated, even smaller cells for the shorter range 9M100 missiles, as they are only 2,5m long and we do not yet if Garry's idea of stacking 2 layers of missiles one on top of the other in the same cell is feasible.

    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 3916
    Points : 3906
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System - Page 6 Empty Re: Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System

    Post  Isos on Sun Jul 21, 2019 3:34 pm

    that is the problem. It is made for 9M96, and probably there is not space for 4 of them quad packed (and there instead a lot of place "wasted" when loaded with only one 9M96 (or 4 quad packed 9M100). with space wasted I mean that a UKSK with a calibr or Onyx looks more efficiently loaded.

    Is there space or no for quad packing 9M96 isn't a problem since it was designed for 1 9m96 per cell. Speculation here won't change that fact. Actual configuration is 1 per cell. They never tested quad packed or bigger missiles so that won't happen.

    If they want to change that they will have to send already made ships to shipyard and change the all system.
    Rodion_Romanovic
    Rodion_Romanovic

    Posts : 500
    Points : 500
    Join date : 2015-12-30

    Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System - Page 6 Empty Re: Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System

    Post  Rodion_Romanovic on Sun Jul 21, 2019 3:55 pm

    Isos wrote:
    that is the problem. It is made for 9M96, and probably there is not space for 4 of them quad packed (and there instead a lot of place "wasted" when loaded with only one 9M96 (or 4 quad packed 9M100). with space wasted I mean that a UKSK with a calibr or Onyx looks more efficiently loaded.

    Is there space or no for quad packing 9M96 isn't a problem since it was designed for 1 9m96 per cell. Speculation here won't change that fact. Actual configuration is 1 per cell. They never tested quad packed or bigger missiles so that won't happen.

    If they want to change that they will have to send already made ships to shipyard and change the all system.

    The change would be only for newly built vessels, of course (Like fitting 24 instead of 16 UKSK VLS starting from the 5th 22350).

    The ships already built can operate with the previous version VLS until their next big refit, for which they need to dock in a shipyard anyway. And even in the case of refit, the change of modules to increase the number of carried VLS cells is not always cost effective.
    Hole
    Hole

    Posts : 2274
    Points : 2272
    Join date : 2018-03-24
    Age : 43
    Location : Merkelland

    Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System - Page 6 Empty Re: Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System

    Post  Hole on Sun Jul 21, 2019 4:31 pm

    The size of the silo gives enough room for improvements.

    Did some official source ever claim that the Poliment-Redut system is optimized for the 9M96?

    It is the first missile to be used, because it is the first missile which was ready. Next step is the 9M100. I guess a four-pack can be fitted into one silo. That gives the Pr. 20380 a load of 48 missiles, which is quite good for such a ship.

    Then a larger missile with greater range will be fitted to the Gorshkovs.

    If they develop a successor for the 9M96 in 20 years there will be enough space even if it gets bigger and heavier.
    avatar
    Austin

    Posts : 7397
    Points : 7794
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System - Page 6 Empty Re: Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System

    Post  Austin on Mon Sep 30, 2019 6:46 pm

    Concern East Kazakhstan region "Almaz-Antey" successfully completed state tests of air defense missile systems "Poliment-Redut"

    http://www.nationaldefense.ru/includes/periodics/defense/2019/0716/130827228/detail.shtml

    Sponsored content

    Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System - Page 6 Empty Re: Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Wed Oct 23, 2019 4:11 pm