Project 22800: "Karakurt" class missile ship

The thing is the radar will see the incoming anti-ship missile and the missile from the Pantsir system can fly a curve.

flamming_python wrote:Still, engaging the ship dead-on towards the bow with a sea-skimming missile seems to be the optimal profile for an attacker.

The Pantsir has a dead-zone that way and won't be able to engage with its autocannons at least, while the 76mm cannon won't be able to engage the missile when its close enough as the bow slopes upward and that gives the gun a depression dead-zone close-in.

Italian DART 76mm ammo looks like can hit the target.  I m sure Russia works on similar stuff like they did for 57mm.

http://www.leonardocompany.com/en/-/dart-1

Hole wrote:The thing is the radar will see the incoming anti-ship missile and the missile from the Pantsir system can fly a curve.

http://www.leonardocompany.com/documents/63265270/66959012/body_STRALES_2013_1.pdf

GunshipDemocracy wrote:

flamming_python wrote:Still, engaging the ship dead-on towards the bow with a sea-skimming missile seems to be the optimal profile for an attacker.

The Pantsir has a dead-zone that way and won't be able to engage with its autocannons at least, while the 76mm cannon won't be able to engage the missile when its close enough as the bow slopes upward and that gives the gun a depression dead-zone close-in.

Italian DART 76mm ammo looks like can hit the target.  I m sure Russia works on similar stuff like they did for 57mm.

http://www.leonardocompany.com/en/-/dart-1

I'm sure Russia has worked on it too.

But you can see from that render that the missile looks to be about 5-10m above sea-level.

Whereas the latest generation of American ASMs will be flying at less than a meter above the water. That means a substantial minimum-range for the 76mm cannon; below which it won't be able to target the missile - unless the shell has a directional warhead of course.

Hole wrote:The thing is the radar will see the incoming anti-ship missile and the missile from the Pantsir system can fly a curve.

Of course; but the missile still has a better chance of getting through by having to contend with just the Pantsir missile; as opposed to the Pantsir missile + autocannons or 76mm cannon fire.

Wikipedia wrote:The gun is fed by 152 ready to fire rounds and has selectable rates of fire of 30, 60 and 120 rounds per minute. The 120 r.p.m. rate is achieved by firing a burst of 75, but afterwards the gun has to cool off for 30 minutes. The AK-176 is effective against missiles, being able to shoot down AT-2 Swatter (simulating a Harpoon anti-ship missile), taking an average of 25 rounds per kill.

New ones should need less rounds. Specially if they are time fuzed to explode near the missile.

And they already have those type of rounds like for exemple for ak 130 gun they have :

Wikipedia wrote:Cartridges used on A-217, A-218, A-222 and A-192M systems are:

F-44 - Explosive round, projectile weight 33.4 kg, explosive weight 3.56 kg, with 4MRM fuze.
ZS-44 - Anti-aircraft round, projectile weight 33.4 kg, explosive weight 3.56 kg, with DVM-60M1 fuze.
ZS-44R - Anti-aircraft round, projectile weight 33.4 kg, explosive weight 3.56 kg, with AR-32 fuze.
Maximum allowed error for ZS-series rounds:

8 m (radio-controlled fuze, anti-ship missiles)
15 m (radio-controlled fuze, aircraft)
Cartridge weight: 52.8 kg. Length: 1364–1369 mm, unitary loading.

flamming_python wrote:
But you can see from that render that the missile looks to be about 5-10m above sea-level.

Whereas the latest generation of American ASMs will be flying at less than a meter above the water. That means a substantial minimum-range for the 76mm cannon; below which it won't be able to target the missile - unless the shell has a directional warhead of course.

Not sure how accurate the render but in technical description there is: maneuverability 40g and also proximity fuze. To me it looks like gun is used as first booster for actual small missile.

You didn't really expect the search radar to be mounted on the combat module did you?

The Kashtan and Kashtan-M have search radars included... such naval mounts have been fully self contained systems and that is particularly because of the scan rate of the main radar on most large Soviet vessels... ie not that fast.

With this new vessel it is electronically scanned so the scan rate for 360 degrees could be measured in miliseconds if you wanted...

dont forget that 120 rounds/min 76mm is very powerful anti missile weapon with right ammo. And engagement range is way beyond 30mm.

I would say the performance of the 76mm gun will be greatly improved with the new AESA radar, as the precision of tracking both the targets and the outgoing shells should make accuracy much better... and with airburst shells the lethality of the rounds should be rather impressive...

If guided shells are used then one to two shots per target should be enough out to about 16km or so.

Still, engaging the ship dead-on towards the bow with a sea-skimming missile seems to be the optimal profile for an attacker.

If you watch ship interceptions with Russian weapons then bow or stern attacks are common with the momentum of the high speed missiles penetrating the full length of the targets doing enormous damage, but look at western missile hits on targets and they often hit from the side.

I think most of the time a western missile will be aimed at the side of a vessel to aim for a much larger side on target view, while Soviet and Russian missiles seem to assume being detected...

Standard procedure for a ships captain with a torpedo or an anti ship missile is to turn towards the target to make your ship a smaller target... with western anti ship missiles that might be useful... against a supersonic missile that might increase the damage done.

The thing is the radar will see the incoming anti-ship missile and the missile from the Pantsir system can fly a curve.

The tracking radar and optics are on the rear mount so targets in front of the bridge would be relatively safe from the Pantsir system.

I would suspect it would mean early detection using the AESAs and the captain turns the ship to bring the Pantsirs to line of sight... while the 76mm gun pumps out shells.

New ones should need less rounds. Specially if they are time fuzed to explode near the missile.

The Russian Army has 30mm cannon shells with air burst fuses that detect coded laser signals to set off the rounds at the correct distance to detonate them at the right time for max effect.

The Russian Army has 30mm cannon shells with air burst fuses that detect coded laser signals to set off the rounds at the correct distance to detonate them at the right time for max effect.

The range of 30mm is very limited and they are better for CIWS use. 76mm or 130mm will have ranges of 10-20km so they are better. Anti ship missiles most of the flight will go straight so it is really easy to shoot them with those sort of munition which can be better than any missile if they have a very good radar fcs and a very good fuze.

If you achieve to need only 1 or 2 rounds per antiship missile with a gun able to shoot 120 rounds per minutes then you can destroy with it all the 8 missiles that most of ships around the world carry.

I think that it could be the future of short/medium air defence systems. If you achieve to make it undetectable by not using radars but only passive detectors then it's just a wonderfull weapon. It is much more cheaper to have a 57 or 76 or 100mm shell with a fuse than to have a missile with a radar and lot of electronics inside. MAWS would be able to spot the shell too so it could be even used against fighters which won't know they are targeted so they won't take evasive actions.

Isos wrote:

The Russian Army has 30mm cannon shells with air burst fuses that detect coded laser signals to set off the rounds at the correct distance to detonate them at the right time for max effect.

The range of 30mm is very limited and they are better for CIWS use. 76mm or 130mm will have ranges of 10-20km so they are better. Anti ship missiles most of the flight will go straight so it is really easy to shoot them with those sort of munition which can be better than any missile if they have a very good radar fcs and a very good fuze.

If you achieve to need only 1 or 2 rounds per antiship missile with a gun able to shoot 120 rounds per minutes then you can destroy with it all the 8 missiles that most of ships around the world carry.

I think that it could be the future of short/medium air defence systems. If you achieve to make it undetectable by not using radars but only passive detectors then it's just a wonderfull weapon. It is much more cheaper to have a 57 or 76 or 100mm shell with a fuse than to have a missile with a radar and lot of electronics inside. MAWS would be able to spot the shell too so it could be even used against fighters which won't know they are targeted so they won't take evasive actions.

Mind that such shells exist for long, but for 30mm calibre they are very expensive. Even Goalkeeper as the best western CIWS cannot achieve 1-2 shells kill rate, but much more! 30mm shells for AO 18 gun has much lower velocity and are by far less effective if fired from this L60cal. barrel. Longer barrel can give more effectiveness, but they are cancelled.

Even Goalkeeper as the best western CIWS cannot achieve 1-2 shells kill rate

I was talking a kill rate of 1-2 shells for 57mm, 76mm and bigger. 30mm should be kept for ak-630 CIWS family.

Kashtan doens´t have a surveillance radar an the module. The large radar tracks the target, the small one the missile.

Hole wrote:Kashtan doens´t have a surveillance radar an the module. The large radar tracks the target, the small one the missile.

[url=https://servimg.com/view/19891322/8][img]https://i.servimg.com/u/f62/19/89l]

It is connected to the other ship's sensors so it doesn't need another surveillance radars which would be smaller and less efficient than the big ones mounted higher on the ship.

I know. GarryB said it has its own surveillance radar.

Looking good built at a reasonable timeframe, overall the ship is armed well enough.

Got a nice placement, weapon layout.

Shes a good corvette alright.

Pella you impress me with your work ethics.

The Kashtan and Kashtan-M have search radars included

As above, there isn't a search radar built into Kashtan, typically seems to be paired to a Positiv dome
eg Neustrashimy

First Talwars have similar setup.

I know. GarryB said it has its own surveillance radar.

And I was mistaken... I remembered the two tracking radars and mistook them for tracking and search radar.

They were both in fact tracking radar as the search function is carried out by the command module on the ship. (usually Positiv)

The two tracking radar on each mount are CM wave and MMW radar for tracking targets and missiles.

Anyway... the Pantsir is a large improvement. And it should be easy to replace the Kashtan with it.

Hole wrote:Anyway... the Pantsir is a large improvement. And it should be easy to replace the Kashtan with it.

Mounting of Pantsir depends on a mounting ring diameter, and also on under deck space for missile replenishment drums. It is more likely that Pantsir can be mounted in place of SA-N-4 on older ships, where it is cost-effective. Long ago, it was meant that kashtan will be mounted in place of AK-630CIWS, but you cannot compare rather simple gun mounting, weighing 3 tons with ammo, and kashtan, weighing 16,5 tons fully loaded!

Pantsir uses the same mount as Kashtan. Look at the pictures.

Replacing the Osa (SA-N-4) would be great, but most ships are already to old. The modernised Nanuchkas will receive a modernised SA-N-4, so...

A Krivak with two Pantsirs...  

Hole wrote:Pantsir uses the same mount as Kashtan. Look at the pictures.

Replacing the Osa (SA-N-4) would be great, but most ships are already to old. The modernised Nanuchkas will receive a modernised SA-N-4, so...

A Krivak with two Pantsirs...  

"Pantsir uses the same mount" - you think it uses "the same diameter deck mounting ring". Also, i still haven`t seen published belowdeck missile stowage for Kashtan, while Pantsir uses two vertical drums, with 16 missiles each. Effectiveness of kashtan has not be proven, I find it rather bulky. Pantsir has similar dimensions and maybe a bit less weight, but the agility of system is improved due to new electronics, electrooptics and servomotors!

The effectiveness of Kashtan has been proven repeatedly against all manner of anti ship threats... if they didn't test their systems against real threats they would still have AK-630s.

Supersonic threats is what made Kashtan necessary... missiles and guns are needed for such threats.

Kashtan is just Tunguska with gatling guns and Pantsir is Pantsir with gatling guns... in many ways you could call the new system Kashtan-M2.

It is interesting that the new system has 16 round magazines... the Kashtan had 12 round magazines for each launch position... 8 missiles on the mount and 24 in mags = 32 on the mount.

16 missiles means 32 in mags and 8 ready to fire meaning 40 rounds ready to fire...

And of course the SA-N-4 was replaced a long time ago where practical by Klintok, and I suspect development of the new smaller higher performing TOR missiles that they would be a rather better replacement option... if they can fit 16 missiles in a TOR vehicles turret they could double the number of Klintok missiles in stealthy vertical launch tube launchers...

What are you guys talking about?  

Pantsir-M clearly uses the same basic chasis as Kashtan but with modernised Pantsir electronics/radar (which is kinda interesting since its different companies, some speculation on Balancer that the one we're seeing now is not the final production version which may be quite different).
If the size was different they'd have also changed a bunch of stuff in the castings but they haven't.



I think Palash also mostly uses the same chassis but does actually have some changes.


Here is a pic of Kashtan reload system (probably on PtG)


And this is the Pantsir-M one, clearly same number of missiles


From my understanding Palash doesn't have a reload system though.

Palash uses the same basic chassis but its rotated 180 degrees (ie backwards).

I was going to say I think its backwards but couldn't find a pic of the back of Palash to confirm.

Yep, not much out there - this is the best I could find, not a photo but a 3D render, but still it suffices.

Hole wrote:Kashtan doens´t have a surveillance radar an the module. The large radar tracks the target, the small one the missile.

Kashtan have surveillance radar. It is placed in the bulb behind Kashtan firing module on your photo.