Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System

    Share
    avatar
    TR1

    Posts : 5679
    Points : 5707
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System

    Post  TR1 on Fri Jun 28, 2013 10:38 pm

    Viktor wrote:
    TR1 wrote:Heres a question that needs answering- do we have any evidence of the Redut-Poliment VLS as it exists today - on the 20380s and 22350s - being able to carry 48N6?
    The system is somewhat of a navalized S-300/400, but I have not seen any actual link between THESE VLS tubes, and the 48N6.

    At this point I am not sure 48N6 is integrated or intended at all for Poliment-Redut.

    I will concede the missiles could very well fit in there if we can see some proof 48N6 actually fits in those VLS cells.

    Be great if we got a pic of the VLS tubes open and from above, that way the size of the opening could be analyzed better.

    P-Redut is based on S-400

    • development of cross-species system based on S-400 "Triumph", ZRAS "polyment-Redoute" and SAM "

    http://bmpd.livejournal.com/456458.html


    Yes no doubt, but what I am looking for is specific mention of naval 48N6 use with Poliment-Redut.
    The radar, network, everything is vastly different from land based system. Hell its different from 20380 (where it barely works!) to the 22350 (where the sensor suit is comparatively magic) .
    I've always kind of assumed 48N6 was part of Poliment-Redut, but I am not sure now, especially with the VLS setup on the corvettes and frigates. It sure hasn't been tested, navally 9M96 has a long way to go alone.
    avatar
    GarryB

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

    Re: Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System

    Post  GarryB on Sat Jun 29, 2013 11:47 am

    Redut is navalised S-400/Vityaz.

    The Redut launchers are compatible with the S-400/Vityaz for the same reason that the S-400 launchers will be able to carry S-400 and Vityaz.

    Note the land based Vityaz launchers likely wont be compatible with the bigger S-400 missiles because it is designed specifically to carry the 9M96 missiles.

    The Land based system therefore has S-400 and Vityaz launchers... presumably the latter with 9M96 and 9M100 missile compatibility, while the former has 9M96 and compatibility with all the larger S-400 missiles including the 250km and 400km range weapons.

    The thing is that the Vityaz is to replace the older shorter range S-300 batteries and has little need for the longer range missiles, while the S-400 can have the shorter range Vityaz missiles or the much longer range missiles.

    The Vityaz on its own will be sufficient for protecting many targets but for major strategic targets the S-400 will be used.

    Targeting will be in conjunction with the IADS including VKO data from satellites, ground radar and AWACS and aircraft like the PAK FA etc.

    At sea there will be an IADS except it will include not just air defence data but data about space based objects and those on the sea surface and underwater and on land targets.

    There is only one standard launcher for the S-300/S-400 SAMs (there is also the Shtil-1 vertical launch system for Shtil missiles of course) and it is standard from Corvette to Carrier.

    The fact that it will likely never use a 400km range S-400 missile is beside the point... it will have the UKSK launcher bins too and may never carry a 2,500km range land attack Kalibr missile either... that is not to say it can't... it just probably wont.

    They wont make a special UKSK launcher for Corvettes and a different one for carriers... both will be the same... that is the whole point behind standardisation.

    Yes no doubt, but what I am looking for is specific mention of naval 48N6 use with Poliment-Redut.
    The radar, network, everything is vastly different from land based system. Hell its different from 20380 (where it barely works!) to the 22350 (where the sensor suit is comparatively magic) .
    I've always kind of assumed 48N6 was part of Poliment-Redut, but I am not sure now, especially with the VLS setup on the corvettes and frigates. It sure hasn't been tested, navally 9M96 has a long way to go alone.

    The point behind a standard weapon system is that it is the same in every instance. On the Kirovs upgrade for example the main radars will be larger than the installation on a Corvette and there will be more than one 32 tube launcher on a Kirov, but otherwise they will be the same, which saves in manufacturing, maintainence, training, logistics, even ship design.

    Saying a small ship like a Corvette doesn't ever need a 400km range SAM is like saying a small Corvette doesn't need a long range anti ship missile.

    Never say never.

    The 400km range S-400 does not need continuous tracking of the target for an intercept... in fact guidance can be handed off to another platform like AWACS or PAK FA.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    Viktor

    Posts : 5669
    Points : 6312
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 37
    Location : Croatia

    Re: Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System

    Post  Viktor on Thu Jul 18, 2013 11:00 am

    Now here is an interesting comparison of the same situation with the US.

    US has MK-41 vertical launchers. Per bay it is able to accommodate one SM-3 (diameter 54cm) or four ESSM (24cm in diameter).

    Now diameter of 48N6 is 50 cm but diameter of 9M96 class missile almost as same as ESSM, 25cm in diameter so similarity with Mk-41 is obvious.

    - Loading container with four ESSM missile launcher in the destroyer DDG-85 "Makkempbell." San Diego, 05.05.2004

     
       
    Anyway any ship in the world that uses Mk-41 launchers can accommodate 4 ESSM (almost same in diameter with 9M96 class) instead of SM-3 or some other
    missiles with larger diameter.




    Anyway here is by far BEST page I managed to find in the internet regarding VLS

    LINK



    - I think now that if it ever was a doubt now is not Very Happy 
    avatar
    Stealthflanker

    Posts : 806
    Points : 888
    Join date : 2009-08-04
    Age : 29
    Location : Indonesia

    Re: Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System

    Post  Stealthflanker on Fri Jul 26, 2013 1:15 am

    Austin wrote:

    The problem is to hit a target at 400 km you need a very powerful radar that can track targets at those range , Where as Frigates are bread and butter ships that provides Area Air Defence and Ship Defence against common threats like anti-ship missile etc , 9M96 is good for that role.

    Well this yes it's true that powerful radar might be needed. Nonetheless for targets like say E-2 or Growler.. it can be targeted using passive means through ESM..picking off their radar/jammer emission..then fly 40N6.

    Well now i really wish to know development of Russian naval based ESM's... ground forces already got Orion and other stuff.. but for navy..kinda mysterious i think.

    eridan

    Posts : 147
    Points : 153
    Join date : 2012-12-13

    would those missiles for redut also be used by vityaz system?

    Post  eridan on Sat Jun 07, 2014 9:16 pm

    would those missiles for redut also be used by vityaz system? or would a more classical looking 9m96 be used? or would a third, different lookign design be used?
    avatar
    GarryB

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

    Re: Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System

    Post  GarryB on Mon Jun 09, 2014 12:50 pm

    Unlike UKSK system there is rather less reliable information about Redut.

    Whether Redut is supposed to include Rif, Rif-M, Vityaz/Redut, and Morfei or just Vityaz/Redut is an interesting question.

    Having one standard system from Corvettes to carrier makes sense to me, but if the one fitted to corvettes does not allow larger missiles to be carried then that makes it non standard for larger vessels.

    I can understand that a corvette will likely never actually need 400km range SAMs, but I think that can be solved simply by not carrying such missiles... most of the time they will likely carry subsonic Klub and anti sub Klub in their UKSK tubes too, with the need for supersonic anti ship missiles like Oniks or 2,500km range land attack cruise missiles like Kalibr rather unlikely but I don't think making different versions of UKSK is a good idea either.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    medo

    Posts : 3247
    Points : 3333
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System

    Post  medo on Mon Jun 09, 2014 5:11 pm

    Redut depend on the size of ship. Steregushy corvette doesn't have enough space to place longer missiles, but even if space is not a problem, its radar doesn't enable the use of longer range missiles, only shorter range 9M96 (small search radar and no engagement radar). Other thing is Gorshkov fregate as it is bigger ship and have far more capable radars (bigger search radar and 4 big engagement radars, which cover 360° around ship) and I wouldn't be surprised if Gorshkov could use 200+ m range 48N6 missiles as it have enough capable radars. But again, is Gorskov's redut launcher long enough to place 48N6 missiles inside?
    avatar
    TR1

    Posts : 5679
    Points : 5707
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System

    Post  TR1 on Mon Jun 09, 2014 8:14 pm

    No, the cells are the same size as the corvettes, but the long range of the 9M96 is enough in any case. Still only a 4500 ton ship.
    avatar
    GarryB

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

    Re: Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System

    Post  GarryB on Tue Jun 10, 2014 3:59 am

    Redut depend on the size of ship.

    But that contradicts the whole purpose of a universal launcher for SAMs.

    What is the point of having a Redut launcher if different size ships have different sized launchers with different missile options for different sizes.

    Steregushy corvette doesn't have enough space to place longer missiles, but even if space is not a problem, its radar doesn't enable the use of longer range missiles, only shorter range 9M96 (small search radar and no engagement radar).

    Think of it in terms of aircraft.

    The proposed fighter version of the Yak-130 will carry R-77s even though it is very unlikely it will be able to engage targets at 110km with them on their own with their own radar. The R-77 doesn't require the launch platform to detect and continually track the target from launch to impact... an Su-35 with half a dozen Yak-130Ps could be flying high with the Su-35 detecting targets for the Yaks who could fire their R-77s based on the target data from the Flankers. the Yaks radar might never even see the targets but that does not matter... the target data from the Flankers is enough to get the R-77s within range of their own radars so they can get a lock and close in for the kill.

    It also means they don't have to spend money developing a new radar guided AAM for light fighters.

    that is the point of a universal BVR medium range AAM. Add a short range AAM (Morfei 9M100) and a super long range missile (R-37M) and you have a good choice of weapons that can be modified with different seeker options of combined seeker options.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    medo

    Posts : 3247
    Points : 3333
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System

    Post  medo on Tue Jun 10, 2014 5:14 pm

    GarryB wrote:But that contradicts the whole purpose of a universal launcher for SAMs.

    What is the point of having a Redut launcher if different size ships have different sized launchers with different missile options for different sizes.

    It doesn't contradict. Redut launcher is universal and could host v big variete of missiles. The size of ship only tell how many different missiles ship could use. All ships could use smaller missiles, but larger ships could use larger missiles.
    avatar
    GarryB

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

    Re: Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System

    Post  GarryB on Wed Jun 11, 2014 10:54 am

    But with Sigma installed on all vessels then each vessel will be able to see everything every other vessel with the Sigma system can see.

    Basically a small vessel like a Corvette wont add a huge amount to Sigma in terms of its sensors, but its small size means it could go into harbours and up rivers or indeed closer to the enemy areas than a larger ship could safely.

    That way a single frigate with say 4 Redut launchers on board could act like an AWACS/JSTARS aircraft to 3-4 Corvettes with 1 Redut launcher each, but benefitting from the longer sensors of the larger vessel. Another similarity with aircraft is that the larger vessel will have longer endurance on station and more weapons, but its endurance and time on station could be further extended in war by cycling corvettes... so a Frigate guarding an area could easily stay on station for weeks, but if air or sea launched cruise missiles are routed through that area then it will go through SAMs fairly quickly. Having 4 Corvettes stationed with that frigate means the Corvettes could be armed with long range missiles to be used with the Frigate sensors and when a corvette is out of missiles it can move back to base at very high speed and reload weapons and supplies and refuel and then sail back out to the Frigate to support it.

    In this way you tie up one Frigate and perhaps 4-6 Corvettes... you are always going to have rather more corvettes than Frigates, plus with one UKSK launcher each Corvette can add up to 8 anti sub or anti ship or land attack cruise missiles or combinations of all three.

    It doesn't contradict. Redut launcher is universal and could host v big variete of missiles. The size of ship only tell how many different missiles ship could use. All ships could use smaller missiles, but larger ships could use larger missiles.

    If it is a standard launcher that is interchangable between vessels then it needs to be the same... ie standard. Having different versions for different ships defeats the purpose of standard.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    medo

    Posts : 3247
    Points : 3333
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System

    Post  medo on Wed Jun 11, 2014 5:00 pm

    GarryB wrote:If it is a standard launcher that is interchangable between vessels then it needs to be the same... ie standard. Having different versions for different ships defeats the purpose of standard.

    Redut launcher is standard as UKSK launcher and could host different missiles. Corvette will use smaller ones and frigate will use bigger ones.


    GarryB wrote:But with Sigma installed on all vessels then each vessel will be able to see everything every other vessel with the Sigma system can see.

    Basically a small vessel like a Corvette wont add a huge amount to Sigma in terms of its sensors, but its small size means it could go into harbours and up rivers or indeed closer to the enemy areas than a larger ship could safely.

    I have no doubts, that Sigma will improve capabilities of Ru navy ships with sharing information and situation picture between ships and other sources. Specially important for cruise missiles and anti ship missiles. Also for air defense, to be more aware of treats and targets. But Sigma itself could not send correcting signals to missiles. Engagement radars do, so 9M96 missile from Steregushi corvette still depend on radar on ship or on information received from Sigma before launch. It could not receive correcting signal from it.

    However we look, 40 km range 9M96 (or 60 km range, if they place 9M96D missile) have more than enough range for corvette, considering that Shtill on Sovremeny destroyer have 30 km range and Klinok in Udaloy destroyer have only 12 km range.
    avatar
    Mike E

    Posts : 2760
    Points : 2806
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System

    Post  Mike E on Wed Oct 08, 2014 5:09 am

    I hate to do this (TR1 will kill me), but I'd like to bring up the topic of 4 9M96 missiles per Redut cell once again.

    Was *it* finally agreed that quad-packing 9M96 missiles in Redut cells *could be done*? Looking back it this thread, nobody really confirmed anything and the topic just suddenly died. I don't really care if Gorshkov will quad-pack or not, as it is just a frigate, but having quad-packing on "Leader" or any other larger ship would be very beneficial. AFAIK, it is a *possibility* that won't be used on Gorshkov, at least not the lead ship.

    Multiple sources claim that it can be done, even on Gorshkov (though I doubt that); http://paralay.net/22350.html and http://militaryrussia.ru/blog/topic-611.html among many others. - Other forum sites also conclude that it will eventually be installed. IMHO, it doesn't really matter as the 9M100 is sufficient for a *frigate*, but it would be nice to know anyway...

    Any more updates? Now I'm starting to think that Redut isn't ready yet, but who knows...
    avatar
    magnumcromagnon

    Posts : 4488
    Points : 4661
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Re: Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Wed Oct 08, 2014 5:25 am

    Mike E wrote:I hate to do this (TR1 will kill me), but I'd like to bring up the topic of 4 9M96 missiles per Redut cell once again.

    Was *it* finally agreed that quad-packing 9M96 missiles in Redut cells *could be done*? Looking back it this thread, nobody really confirmed anything and the topic just suddenly died. I don't really care if Gorshkov will quad-pack or not, as it is just a frigate, but having quad-packing on "Leader" or any other larger ship would be very beneficial. AFAIK, it is a *possibility* that won't be used on Gorshkov, at least not the lead ship.

    Multiple sources claim that it can be done, even on Gorshkov (though I doubt that); http://paralay.net/22350.html and http://militaryrussia.ru/blog/topic-611.html among many others. - Other forum sites also conclude that it will eventually be installed. IMHO, it doesn't really matter as the 9M100 is sufficient for a *frigate*, but it would be nice to know anyway...

    Any more updates? Now I'm starting to think that Redut isn't ready yet, but who knows...

    I think the problem was the missile was a bit too wide for quad packing (of course this is still just speculation), however it's not impossible that a modified 9M96 missile "could' be quad packed. As is theirs quite a bit of length space not used, they can modify the 9M96 to shorten the width of the diameter of the missile, and increase the length to match the interior length of the canister.
    avatar
    Mike E

    Posts : 2760
    Points : 2806
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System

    Post  Mike E on Wed Oct 08, 2014 5:33 am

    magnumcromagnon wrote:
    Mike E wrote:I hate to do this (TR1 will kill me), but I'd like to bring up the topic of 4 9M96 missiles per Redut cell once again.

    Was *it* finally agreed that quad-packing 9M96 missiles in Redut cells *could be done*? Looking back it this thread, nobody really confirmed anything and the topic just suddenly died. I don't really care if Gorshkov will quad-pack or not, as it is just a frigate, but having quad-packing on "Leader" or any other larger ship would be very beneficial. AFAIK, it is a *possibility* that won't be used on Gorshkov, at least not the lead ship.

    Multiple sources claim that it can be done, even on Gorshkov (though I doubt that); http://paralay.net/22350.html and http://militaryrussia.ru/blog/topic-611.html among many others. - Other forum sites also conclude that it will eventually be installed. IMHO, it doesn't really matter as the 9M100 is sufficient for a *frigate*, but it would be nice to know anyway...

    Any more updates? Now I'm starting to think that Redut isn't ready yet, but who knows...

    I think the problem was the missile was a bit too wide for quad packing (of course this is still just speculation), however it's not impossible that a modified 9M96 missile "could' be quad packed. As is theirs quite a bit of length space not used, they can modify the 9M96 to shorten the width of the diameter of the missile, and increase the length to match the interior length of the canister.

    Simple math suggests it *can* be quad-packed... As with pictures posted earlier, the Redut *can hold* (won't in Gorshkov) the larger S-400 missiles, and as such, it could quad-pack the 9M96...
    avatar
    TR1

    Posts : 5679
    Points : 5707
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System

    Post  TR1 on Wed Oct 08, 2014 9:00 am

    You have summoned me with a topic that is like an irritation that will just not go away.

    What we saw recently was good footage of 9M96 being launched by a 20380, and a nice clear view of the launch tube. What is clearly seen, is there is one 9m96 missile tube per cell.
    There really is nothing left to debate there, forget quad-packing 9M96 in that size of cells.

    However what has also appeared recently is finally confirmation that 9M100 not only exists, but is in some study of production/testing/marketing to mil.
    A nice pic from Almaz-Antei with a quad pack 9M100 appeared, and size wise it surely looks like it could fit inside each individual cell on say a 20380 or a 22350.
    However, I have seen zero info on how easy it is to swap missile types, and if it is even planned.

    avatar
    Morpheus Eberhardt

    Posts : 1942
    Points : 2059
    Join date : 2013-05-20

    Re: Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System

    Post  Morpheus Eberhardt on Wed Oct 08, 2014 11:11 am

    I thought I would repost one of my earlier post on this subject.

    On 05/06/14 Morpheus Eberhardt wrote:
    TR1 wrote:Yes, as I thought from the start.

    It is a small ship, Redut is a pretty potent system on a corvette.

    I stand corrected. I was one of the people that thought there would be 48 of the 9M96/9M96D class missiles in the 12 launcher wells.

    My current assessment is as follows.

    Having twelve of such highly potent missiles in this warship qualitatively represents a very high level of capability but also a low quantity of missiles. Also this arrangement makes inefficient use of the deck area; it is worth noting all of the empty, unused space in each well.

    It is possible to fit, may be, 9 X 9M100 class missiles in each well, but that would equate to a case diametrically opposite to the above situation. A combination of 9M96-class and 9M100-class would still not address a requirement for a moderately large number of moderately capable missiles.

    Based on the above considerations, I think these ships will additionally use a class of moderate-size radar guided missile (similar to 9M338 or 9M339 class) where four of each can fit in each well.

    My calculations show that the 9M338-class and the 9M339-class of missiles have a fuselage diameter of about 195 mm; TLC diameter is 240 mm. 9M96/9M96D missiles, on the other hand, have fuselage diameters of 240 mm.

    Also to consider is, for example, Agat's "9B-1103M-150" Ka band active seeker which is designed for missiles with fuselage diameters of 150 mm.

    In conclusion, I think the load-out would include a few larger missiles, a few smaller missiles, and many medium-size ones.
    avatar
    Mike E

    Posts : 2760
    Points : 2806
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System

    Post  Mike E on Wed Oct 08, 2014 4:16 pm

    TR1 wrote:You have summoned me with a topic that is like an irritation that will just not go away.

    What we saw recently was good footage of 9M96 being launched by a 20380, and a nice clear view of the launch tube. What is clearly seen, is there is one 9m96 missile tube per cell.
    There really is nothing left to debate there, forget quad-packing 9M96 in that size of cells.

    However what has also appeared recently is finally confirmation that 9M100 not only exists, but is in some study of production/testing/marketing to mil.
    A nice pic from Almaz-Antei with a quad pack 9M100 appeared, and size wise it surely looks like it could fit inside each individual cell on say a 20380 or a 22350.
    However, I have seen zero info on how easy it is to swap missile types, and if it is even planned.

    Very Happy

    I agree that they won't be quad-packed on frigates, but it is on larger vessels where it would be the most beneficial. Unusually, some sources claim that the E can quad-pack but the E2 can't, which is both unusual and probably just disinformation. 

    The 9M100 *will* be quad-packed for certain, nice to hear that it is going along fine...
    avatar
    Mike E

    Posts : 2760
    Points : 2806
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System

    Post  Mike E on Wed Oct 08, 2014 4:22 pm

    Morpheus Eberhardt wrote:I thought I would repost one of my earlier post on this subject.

    On 05/06/14 Morpheus Eberhardt wrote:
    TR1 wrote:Yes, as I thought from the start.

    It is a small ship, Redut is a pretty potent system on a corvette.

    I stand corrected. I was one of the people that thought there would be 48 of the 9M96/9M96D class missiles in the 12 launcher wells.

    My current assessment is as follows.

    Having twelve of such highly potent missiles in this warship qualitatively represents a very high level of capability but also a low quantity of missiles. Also this arrangement makes inefficient use of the deck area; it is worth noting all of the empty, unused space in each well.

    It is possible to fit, may be, 9 X 9M100 class missiles in each well, but that would equate to a case diametrically opposite to the above situation. A combination of 9M96-class and 9M100-class would still not address a requirement for a moderately large number of moderately capable missiles.

    Based on the above considerations, I think these ships will additionally use a class of moderate-size radar guided missile (similar to 9M338 or 9M339 class) where four of each can fit in each well.

    My calculations show that the 9M338-class and the 9M339-class of missiles have a fuselage diameter of about 195 mm; TLC diameter is 240 mm. 9M96/9M96D missiles, on the other hand, have fuselage diameters of 240 mm.

    Also to consider is, for example, Agat's "9B-1103M-150" Ka band active seeker which is designed for missiles with fuselage diameters of 150 mm.

    In conclusion, I think the load-out would include a few larger missiles, a few smaller missiles, and many medium-size ones.
    The 9M100 will be stored in cells via four per cell and no more. I think that more *could fit*, but they chose to keep it at four...

    I disagree... A good combo could exist and be something like (I know this is a re-post) 12 long-ranged "D2's" and 12 medium ranged "D's", as well as 32 9M100's quad-packed into the remaining cells.

    +1, but the Redut system isn't capable with the 9M338, is it?
    avatar
    Mike E

    Posts : 2760
    Points : 2806
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System

    Post  Mike E on Wed Oct 08, 2014 11:12 pm

    I wish that they would have designed the Redut to be 100% modular (interchangeable)! - As in, for the 9M96 they have a special cell that was built for it, so that the largest possible number of missiles could be held. Or, you could have one for the 9M338 etc, and once again, it would free up space. Of course it would be both more expensive and more complex, but the advantages compensate for that IMHO.
    avatar
    GarryB

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

    Re: Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System

    Post  GarryB on Thu Oct 09, 2014 4:19 am

    Cells are one of the simplest systems on board, even with the software included.

    They contain monitoring equipment and of course a roof hatch for missile launch, but are much simpler than the automated missile handlers needed for an arm launcher, plus the arm launcher.

    For example the SA-N-7 launcher has a single arm launcher that can rotate 360 degrees and elevate from 0 to 90 degrees. Beneath the deck however you need large numbers of missiles suspended in racks so that they can be moved or rotated into line to get raised up and loaded onto the arm launcher. From memory the system had about 36 ready to launch missiles on each Sovremmeny class vessel launcher.

    This means for each arm launcher there is a missile handling system for up to 36 missiles below deck... with the simplest option that means 6 rotary missile holders located around the arm launcher each with 6 missiles.

    In comparison, 36 cell launchers is much simpler with less handling and missile movement. In high sea states moving those missiles to the arm launcher for launch has the risk of damage and alignment problems.

    I comparison 6 rows of 6 tubes is compact and reliable and simple.

    IMO no russian ship deserves to use a palash. It should only be reserved for export model downgrades.

    it was intended as a simple cheap export item, but then four gatling guns with two system mounts with 16 missiles would be a fairly potent little set up.

    which makes it extremely difficult to jam.

    Very true.

    Was *it* finally agreed that quad-packing 9M96 missiles in Redut cells *could be done*?

    The real issue is what is the Redut launcher. It is the equivalent of Vityaz for the Army, or is it the equivalent of S-400 for the army.

    If it is the former then it will be one medium missile per tube and possibly four short range missiles per tube... potential for stacking of course as the 9M96 will be much longer than the 9M100 so there is potential for layers where one tube could hold three layers of the short range missiles holding 12 per tube, so 4 tubes could hold an effective amount of self defence missiles and the remaining tubes can be used for longer range weapons.

    It might be that the Corvettes and Frigates have Vityaz/Redut and the larger vessels have an S-400 that can carry S-500 and S-400 naval equivalents per tube and 4 Vityaz per tube... and potentially rather large numbers of 9M100... 3 x 8?

    I think the main issue was depth... the S-300/400 is a big missile and would take all of the draught of a small ship and then need some superstructure above deck.

    the smaller Vityaz missiles are rather more compact and reduce or eliminate the need for a large above deck superstructure, and also have missiles with 60-160km range which is more appropriate to the role of a Frigate or Corvette.

    Having said that there could be deck space for other launchers with smaller missiles like 9M100 dedicated launch bins of rather shorter draught.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    Morpheus Eberhardt

    Posts : 1942
    Points : 2059
    Join date : 2013-05-20

    Re: Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System

    Post  Morpheus Eberhardt on Thu Oct 16, 2014 10:35 am

    Mike E wrote:... but the Redut system isn't capable with the 9M338, is it?

    There is technically nothing to stop it from using 9M338 class of missiles, and 4 missiles of this size can easily fit (with armor) in each of the wells.
    avatar
    Mike E

    Posts : 2760
    Points : 2806
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System

    Post  Mike E on Thu Oct 16, 2014 6:52 pm

    Morpheus Eberhardt wrote:
    Mike E wrote:... but the Redut system isn't capable with the 9M338, is it?

    There is technically nothing to stop it from using 9M338 class of missiles, and 4 missiles of this size can easily fit (with armor) in each of the wells.

    I'm thinking that it is incompatible due to software differences etc. The Redut is just the naval version of the Vityaz system, and the Vityaz definitely doesn't (can't) carry the 9M338.
    avatar
    GarryB

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

    Re: Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System

    Post  GarryB on Fri Oct 17, 2014 11:00 am

    Anyway, I actually do expect more orders, especially because of the ever increasing budget. - What do you think GarryB?

    Frigates are relatively cheap and useful, so if successful I would expect a few new orders over time.

    And of course over time radars and missiles will be upgraded too.

    I'm thinking that it is incompatible due to software differences etc. The Redut is just the naval version of the Vityaz system, and the Vityaz definitely doesn't (can't) carry the 9M338.

    If the problem was only software related then a patch upgrade or new module would solve that problem.

    The UKSK is designed as a universal system for heavy land attack, anti ship, and anti sub missiles.

    there was talk of a universal SAM equivalent too.

    Basically they ideally want a unified system to carry the Naval equivalent of the Air Force S-300, the S-400, the S-350, the S-500, and the army equivalent of the TOR, and the BUK and now the Morfei in one tube launch system.

    Quite a challenge.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    Mike E

    Posts : 2760
    Points : 2806
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System

    Post  Mike E on Fri Oct 17, 2014 4:24 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    Anyway, I actually do expect more orders, especially because of the ever increasing budget. - What do you think GarryB?

    Frigates are relatively cheap and useful, so if successful I would expect a few new orders over time.

    And of course over time radars and missiles will be upgraded too.

    I'm thinking that it is incompatible due to software differences etc. The Redut is just the naval version of the Vityaz system, and the Vityaz definitely doesn't (can't) carry the 9M338.

    If the problem was only software related then a patch upgrade or new module would solve that problem.

    The UKSK is designed as a universal system for heavy land attack, anti ship, and anti sub missiles.

    there was talk of a universal SAM equivalent too.

    Basically they ideally want a unified system to carry the Naval equivalent of the Air Force S-300, the S-400, the S-350, the S-500, and the army equivalent of the TOR, and the BUK and now the Morfei in one tube launch system.

    Quite a challenge.
    Exactly, and they would be very appreciated as well... 

    So it can carry the 9M338? I haven't heard anyhting suggesting that, more so when it is (like you've said) a naval version of the 9M96/9M100 launching Vityaz. We will have to see, but I somewhat doubt it...

    Sponsored content

    Re: Poliment-Redut Naval Air Defense System

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Mon Dec 18, 2017 12:34 am