Russia Defence Forum

Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 25917
    Points : 26463
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Naval Weapon Systems & Technology - Page 2 Empty Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  GarryB on Mon Feb 27, 2012 9:57 am

    Austin... I am surprised at you...

    One member of the Club family delivers Torpedoes to a range of 40km for the ship launched model and 50km for the sub launched model.

    Every modern Russian ship with a UKSK system will be able to use it...
    avatar
    Austin

    Posts : 7619
    Points : 8016
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Naval Weapon Systems & Technology - Page 2 Empty Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Austin on Mon Feb 27, 2012 10:40 am

    I know about Klub but I am talking about the big long range ones with 533 mm Torpedoes , Klub carries a small torpedo APR-3 series which are smaller 350 mm torpedoes.

    http://eng.ktrv.ru/production_eng/323/512/521/

    http://militaryforces.ru/weapon-2-35-212.html
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 25917
    Points : 26463
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Naval Weapon Systems & Technology - Page 2 Empty Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  GarryB on Mon Feb 27, 2012 11:55 pm

    AFAIK only Medvedka and Klub and both use the smaller torpedo... which BTW is sufficient for any western submarine.
    avatar
    Austin

    Posts : 7619
    Points : 8016
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Naval Weapon Systems & Technology - Page 2 Empty Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Austin on Fri Mar 09, 2012 6:57 pm

    GarryB wrote:AFAIK only Medvedka and Klub and both use the smaller torpedo... which BTW is sufficient for any western submarine.

    My point related to 533 mm Torpedo for SS-N-16 like weapon was not related to its warhead size which is sufficient which i agree but compared to 350 mm weapon a 533 mm weapon would have bigger sensors and can have better processing capability to sniff out silent submarine plus it would afford longer range and higher speed compared to smaller weapon.

    Some interesting Torpedo development that can be worth considering are the Black Shark and F21 both are 522 mm weapon

    Check it out

    Black Shark http://www.wass.it/WASSWEB/brochure/black_shark.pdf
    F21 http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_generic.jsp?channel=dti&id=news/dti/2011/02/01/DT_02_01_2011_p20-283026.xml

    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 25917
    Points : 26463
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Naval Weapon Systems & Technology - Page 2 Empty Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  GarryB on Sat Mar 10, 2012 2:26 am

    No 533mm torpedo can move as fast through water or as "silently" as a rocket travelling through the air.

    It makes rather more sense to use a smaller torpedo and simply try to drop it closer to the target.

    The problem is that a 21 inch torpedo is already very large and heavy so a rocket stage needed to carry that 50km or more will mean it will be rather long and heavy and a bit larger calibre than the original torpedo.

    If they still used their 650mm torpedo tubes then it would be a good option for their Subs but I don't think they are continuing to use them in their new vessels.
    avatar
    Austin

    Posts : 7619
    Points : 8016
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Naval Weapon Systems & Technology - Page 2 Empty Russian SSN

    Post  Austin on Sat May 05, 2012 6:30 am

    Garry from what we could see in Club class weapon , the rocket torpedo has been standardised with 533 mm Rocket Torpedo carrying 350 mm Torpedo , which is good.
    avatar
    Mindstorm

    Posts : 995
    Points : 1162
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Naval Weapon Systems & Technology - Page 2 Empty Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Mindstorm on Fri Sep 07, 2012 2:24 pm



    Boris Obsonov ,General Director of Tactical Missile Corporation, announce at Гидроавиасалоне-2012 that plans to increase both range and speed of the already outstanding underwater missile-torpedo "Squall" are actually in work in response to ever increasing interest ,by part of potential international buyers, toward this advanced weapon.


    http://vz.ru/news/2012/9/7/597040.html


    Other interesting points touched are the finished works for the export version of both the greatly improved models of air-lauched high speed anti-ship missile- Kh-31-AD- and antiradar missile Kh-31PD



    The last word , obviously to the development of Hypersonic Missiles defined by Boris Obsonov (....in the same way of any other knowledgeable, technical responsible in military field Rolling Eyes ) a truly crucial segment with immeasurable potential benefical returns in the Aerospace Civil sector.

    avatar
    Austin

    Posts : 7619
    Points : 8016
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Naval Weapon Systems & Technology - Page 2 Empty Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Austin on Fri Sep 07, 2012 5:49 pm

    So what is the next generation Squall is Russian Navy working on , I mean not the export model but what RuN uses , will it have guidance , higher speed and range ?
    avatar
    Mindstorm

    Posts : 995
    Points : 1162
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Naval Weapon Systems & Technology - Page 2 Empty Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Mindstorm on Fri Sep 07, 2012 11:37 pm

    , will it have guidance , higher speed and range ?


    Yes, its speed will be increased over that of the domestic version (superior to 500 Km/h) so will its range


    will it have guidance



    Will ? Sometime i remain surprised that some "notions" could become so rooted in common immaginary (for effect of an odd, foundless information repeated over and over ) even when it result completely irreconcilable not only with any rational inference ,but even only with mere common good sense.

    The only version of "Shkval" devoid of guidance (simply because it would have provided foreign entities with a deep understanding of the technical principles at the basis of the VA-111's propulsion ) was the export version that ,in fact ,was limited to 7 km engagement range (the maximum allowing a similar unguided cavitating torpedo to retain any type of effective operational employment) and only against surface targets.

    This is a brief article with some historical facts on VA-111's development ,by Alexander Karpenko ,which could aid at realize as, already in Soviet times VA-111 ,in its advanced incarnations, was obviously never conceived as an unguided weapon .


    http://vpk-news.ru/articles/3990





    TR1
    TR1

    Posts : 5554
    Points : 5562
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Naval Weapon Systems & Technology - Page 2 Empty Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  TR1 on Sat Sep 08, 2012 12:22 am

    Has Squal ever been deployed on Russian subs post USSR?

    I believe no.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 25917
    Points : 26463
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Naval Weapon Systems & Technology - Page 2 Empty Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  GarryB on Sat Sep 08, 2012 1:36 am

    Why wouldn't it be?

    AFAIK they are successful weapons that are fairly widely deployed.

    Note these are not the HTP powered torpedoes that destroyed the Kursk, AFAIK Shkval torpedoes are not powered by HTP, which is better known as hydrogen peroxide.
    AlfaT8
    AlfaT8

    Posts : 1890
    Points : 1885
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    Naval Weapon Systems & Technology - Page 2 Empty Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  AlfaT8 on Mon Feb 04, 2013 6:08 pm

    Anybody know what the status is on the Russian Paket-E/NK anti-torpedo defense system?? Question
    TR1
    TR1

    Posts : 5554
    Points : 5562
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Naval Weapon Systems & Technology - Page 2 Empty Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  TR1 on Mon Feb 04, 2013 10:09 pm

    Paket is used on the 20380 operationally.
    AlfaT8
    AlfaT8

    Posts : 1890
    Points : 1885
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    Naval Weapon Systems & Technology - Page 2 Empty Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  AlfaT8 on Mon Feb 04, 2013 11:24 pm

    TR1 wrote:Paket is used on the 20380 operationally.

    That's good, i thought the project was abandoned. Surprised

    Any other ships or just the 20380?
    TR1
    TR1

    Posts : 5554
    Points : 5562
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Naval Weapon Systems & Technology - Page 2 Empty Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  TR1 on Mon Feb 04, 2013 11:32 pm

    22350 is also going to use the Paket.
    Not sure about anything else, but that is quite a lot of ships as is.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 25917
    Points : 26463
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Naval Weapon Systems & Technology - Page 2 Empty Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  GarryB on Tue Feb 05, 2013 9:07 am

    Actually I remember discussing the Paket system a while back and the person I was chatting to had concluded that the Paket system had been selected by the Russian Navy as the way forward.

    As far as anti torpedo systems go the Russians had the RBU series of depth charge throwers that launched a range of rocket types in the path of torpedoes including jammers, floating mines, and depth charges in the path of the incoming torpedoes... these rockets could also be used against divers and enemy submarines.

    The problem is that these rocket systems weren't very stealthy as they were not retractable.

    I have seen a ship design drawing I think Austin posted of a light patrol boat that seemed to have a vertical launch system that included small calibre rockets so they might be going to vertical launch alternatives, but I suspect the higher kill ratio of a Paket system against an enemy torpedo has been chosen for its cost effectiveness and stealthiness over the old RBUs.
    George1
    George1

    Posts : 14937
    Points : 15436
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Naval Weapon Systems & Technology - Page 2 Empty Russia to Develop Naval Equivalent of U.S. Aegis Defense System

    Post  George1 on Mon Feb 18, 2013 1:36 pm

    Russia is set to develop a sea-based missile defense program similar to the U.S. Aegis system, a senior defense industry official said on Friday.

    Aegis, designed to intercept ballistic missiles at the post-boost phase and prior to reentry, is part of the U.S. national missile defense strategy.

    “This task has been assigned to [the defense] industry,” said Anatoly Shlemov, head of the state defense contracts department at the United Shipbuilding Corporation.

    Aegis analogs are being developed at companies affiliated with PVO Almaz-Antei [an air defense concern],” he said.

    He declined to elaborate citing the classified nature of the topic.

    http://en.rian.ru/military_news/20120831/175538466.html
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 25917
    Points : 26463
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Naval Weapon Systems & Technology - Page 2 Empty Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  GarryB on Tue Feb 19, 2013 9:31 am

    Actually that is not true... AEGIS is a naval based battle management system that takes data from sonar, radar and other sensors and combines them into a subsurface, surface, and air picture to help defend carrier battle groups at sea.

    Only recently has it acquired any ABM capability.

    The Russian Navy equivalent of AEGIS is called Sigma and pretty much does the same thing of combining data from subsurface, sea, land, air and space assets to provide a complete picture of the battlespace and can be used to direct the defence of assets.

    Even the smallest new Russian Corvette is being fitted with Sigma and the standard cruise missile VLS and SAM VLS systems. A tiny Corvette could use data from a carrier 500km away to launch a 400km range SAM at a target 300km away from the Corvette and 200km from the carrier using data from the carriers AWACS aircraft... not many other corvettes have that capacity.
    KomissarBojanchev
    KomissarBojanchev

    Posts : 1440
    Points : 1601
    Join date : 2012-08-05
    Age : 22
    Location : Varna, Bulgaria

    Naval Weapon Systems & Technology - Page 2 Empty Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  KomissarBojanchev on Thu Feb 28, 2013 1:22 pm

    I honestly dont think the shkval is an effective weapon now and wont be in the future due to:
    1. its extremely short range. A seahawk helicopter would destroy the submarine long before its in range to fire the shkval.
    2. Its too noisy and will emmediately uncover the submarines approximate location.

    I think AshMs like the klub and very long range high calibre torpedos are far more useful than submerged rockets.
    avatar
    Mindstorm

    Posts : 995
    Points : 1162
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Naval Weapon Systems & Technology - Page 2 Empty Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Mindstorm on Fri Mar 01, 2013 3:43 pm


    I honestly dont think the shkval is an effective weapon now and wont be in the future due to:
    1. its extremely short range. A seahawk helicopter would destroy the submarine long before its in range to fire the shkval.
    2. Its too noisy and will emmediately uncover the submarines approximate location.



    And anyone here honestly hope that your opinion will be totally shared by US Navy Command and those of its allied nations ,it would be a true dream realized Very Happy
    Unluckily i honestly believe that they share the opinion exactly opposite to yours.....



    1) Shkval-E torpedo offered on international market is not only a vastly downgraded version of the first model of VA-111 (capable moreover to hit only surface units ) but also show an immensely simplified propulsion section just to prevent anyone to obtain ,from samples of this export version ,any technical information useful for develop, at its own time, a supercavitating torpedo version even only on par with the first domestic version.

    2) Even this vastly downgraded unguided export version of the first model of VA-111 can represent a simply deadly weapon ,without any peer among competitors in the hands of a proficient operator.
    The weapon ,in facts, assure the destruction of the attacked targets in spite of any defensive torpedo counter-measure on board for the simple reason that ,in virtue of its enormous speed ,it can literally proceed toward the computed intercept point in a totally unguided way (therefore totally immune to any soft-kill countermeasure) and still prevent the engaged ship to avoid the impact in any way; also the immensely more advanced and faster guided version can initiate the terminal , completely inertial, engagement phase toward the intercept point far outside the range of any anti-torpedo defensive countermeasure.
    The only real defensive countermeasure against those class of weapons is represented by active anti-torpedo hard-kill defensive systems such as "Paket" ,anyhow with reduced threat's suppression chances; but ,at today ,exactly as for VA-111 torpedo, don't exist any western corresponding to Paket hard kill defensive system. Wink )



    A seahawk helicopter would destroy the submarine long before its in range to fire the shkval.


    Laughing Laughing Laughing


    Dozen of different systems could be used to attempt to engage an enemy submarine .....if detected in first instance and....if detected long enough .
    Several of those systems, wanting only to talk of conventional means, are hundreds of times more efficient than an Sh-60 (used mostly to deploy sonobuoys screens or to remotely investigate a "contact" at a speed of....170-180 km/h Laughing

    Do you know, if you receive a remote contact from a sonobuoys barrier or a bottom MAD sensors or thermo-differential detector or even a distant submarine or ship, two or three RPK-7 "Veter" or 91R1 "Kalibr" going toward the coordinates at more than 1800 km/h or 2400 km/h have several hundreds of times more chances to destroy the detected enemy submarine before the contact go lost.

    Returning to the real range of detection of enemy submarines (outside national sea areas covered by overlapping sensor systems) results obtained by the entire ASW screens of US NAvy CVBGs against even the most outdated foreign conventional submarines -several of which vastly inferior even to export models of first version ok Kilo class - are ......not perfectly encouraging.





    This is a cute photo taken by the......Oberon-class !!! .... HMAS "Onslow" submarine of the Nimitz-class aircraft carrier USS "Carl Vinson" ,just before executing its simulated "kill" from ....300 yards after having surpassed totally undetected the surface and submarine screen of the CVBG




    Naval Weapon Systems & Technology - Page 2 Scope





    This is USS "Enterprise" ,in all its beauty, kindly eternalized by a photo from a German Type 206A





    Naval Weapon Systems & Technology - Page 2 Ccventerprise01






    This instead is a lovely closing salutation ,before the kill, from the much more modern Type 212, SMG "S. Todaro" to the Nimitz-class aircraft carrier USS "Theodore Roosevelt" ,just seconds after having engaged also a destroyer of its escort Wink



    Naval Weapon Systems & Technology - Page 2 212ecvn71



    And so on with Australian Collin class, Chinese Song class , Dutch Zwaardvis-class etc…..

    With VA-111-E (export version) torpedo any submarine, in the same conditions and operation time, would have been perfectly capable to engage the entire CVBG instead of one or two at maximum, with the absolute certainty ,not only that none of the attacked ships would have been capable to neutralize in any way the menace , but that the immensely reduced time for the target's destruction and the lack of need for any wire guidance wouldn't have conceded to them any window for execute a counter attack on the submarine .


    "seahawk helicopter would destroy the submarine long before its in range to fire the shkval".......oh yes, yes, of course. Rolling Eyes Rolling Eyes


    Werewolf
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5291
    Points : 5494
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Naval Weapon Systems & Technology - Page 2 Empty Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Werewolf on Fri Mar 01, 2013 6:04 pm

    like a boss Cool
    KomissarBojanchev
    KomissarBojanchev

    Posts : 1440
    Points : 1601
    Join date : 2012-08-05
    Age : 22
    Location : Varna, Bulgaria

    Naval Weapon Systems & Technology - Page 2 Empty Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  KomissarBojanchev on Fri Mar 01, 2013 6:54 pm

    Another doubt about russian weapons capability once again destroyed for good Very Happy
    However If an oliver perry FFG, P-3 orion, etc. do eventually locate a soviet submarine(lets say schuka-1 for example)and release the AS torps what kinds of countermeasures do the sovietsailors have at their diposal? Will we see the paket in the yasen and lada class?
    avatar
    Mindstorm

    Posts : 995
    Points : 1162
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Naval Weapon Systems & Technology - Page 2 Empty Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Mindstorm on Sat Mar 02, 2013 1:18 pm




    If an oliver perry FFG, P-3 orion, etc. do eventually locate a soviet submarine(lets say schuka-1 for example)and release the AS torps what kinds of countermeasures do the sovietsailors have at their diposal? Will we see the paket in the yasen and lada class?


    Paket ?

    Likely you have completely lost mine point in calling Paket hard kill defensive system in the argumentation : Paket is required for neutralize SUPERCAVITATING torpedo, with speed in exceeds of 220 kn, against which neither maneuvering, neither soft kill countermeasures can achieve any effect.
    At today a pr. 971 would never have the problem to confront a supercavitating torpedo for the simple reason that no "enemy" Navy has any of them in theirs inventory.

    Returning to your question, i find it very strange because, by now, is a commonly accepted fact that, on average, Russian nuclear submarine's survivability is MUCH, MUCH GREATER than all theirs western counterparts.

    The reasons contributing to that are several ,among which:


    1) Significantly higher depth limit
    2) Significantly higher speed and maneuverability
    3) Double hull construction
    4) Employment of higher yield steel ( AK-29 and Ak-32 steel since plain Cold War against the HY-60 and 80 used by US Very Happy )
    5) Extensive employment of titanium/titanium alloys
    6) Much greater reserve buoyancy
    7) Higher compartmentalization
    Cool Significantly lower magnetic signature
    9) Superior level of automation and systems redundancy
    10)Greater propulsion reactor's density (reduced chance of hit and of critical propulsion failure)

    If we talk of the Akula class named in your question, we must add to what up said also:

    1) Presence of the unique -not foreign analogues- MG-74/74M or MG-104 multispectral programmable decoy, capable to perfectly mimic submarine signatures, movements and behavior for more than an hour !!
    2) Hydrodynamics polymers delivering systems (to greatly enhances ,momentarily, submarine outer hull's hydrodynamics coefficient so to avoid enemy torpedo eventually not seduced/outranged)


    Just to provide a measure of the difficulty to hit a submarine proceding at high speed and great depth, is sufficient to remember that an APR-3/3M rocket propelled torpedo (also here we talk of a weapon with absolutely not western analogue) used also in anti-submarine variant of "Kaliber" missile, with a terminal engagement speed of about 100 knot ,about 2 times and half the speed of a Mk-46 torpedo..., and with significantly more powerful warhead than Mk-46 too, can engage targets with a maximum speed of 43 knot when this target proceed at depth greater than 290 m(naturally at the grow of the depth the Pk decrease accordingly)


    But all of what said obviously make no difference for the US, for no other reason that the unique nations it attack (in big NATO coalitions ,always enjoying crushing numerical advantage and ,very often, only after years of insulating international embargo) are only immensely inferior ones equipped with few export versions of weapon systems 30-35 years older. Razz Razz



    avatar
    Mindstorm

    Posts : 995
    Points : 1162
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Naval Weapon Systems & Technology - Page 2 Empty Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Mindstorm on Sat Mar 02, 2013 1:52 pm



    Next generation -5th- torpedo "Ломонос" and new generation of anti-torpoedo countermeasure МГ-124 "Бериллий" to be introduced within four years ; other programs in advancement too.



    http://www.almaz.info/3124.html



    Very likely the introduction of Pr. 885M, improved Yasen class, will follow the state test acceptance of those new generation weapons and defensive systems.


    avatar
    Austin

    Posts : 7619
    Points : 8016
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Naval Weapon Systems & Technology - Page 2 Empty Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Austin on Sat Mar 02, 2013 2:04 pm

    Nice Post Mindstorm , Was missing you in action for some time , Welcome back

    Sponsored content

    Naval Weapon Systems & Technology - Page 2 Empty Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Sat Sep 26, 2020 12:32 am