Gepard class frigate for Caspian Sea

Is it a modernised version with VLS?

Cool, does it also have helipad, hangar for Ka-27 and Paket torpedo system?

Or the version with pantsir and additional VLS does not have the hangar?
Does Russia now produces the engines for it?

Rodion_Romanovic wrote:Is it a modernised version with VLS?

Cool, does it also have helipad, hangar for Ka-27 and Paket torpedo system?

Or the version with pantsir and additional VLS does not have the hangar?
Does Russia now produces the engines for it?

To be honest, bro, there are no more detailed data, but it looks good..
Look at picture number TWOO and you will see on each side a four-barrel torpedo tube.
There is no information about specifications and engines, but two UKSK launchers can be seen in the picture, one in front of the command bridge and one aft between the Pantsir-M. Launchers for 9K96 are in the middle..
And this free part at the stern of the model does not seem spacious enough for a helicopter landing. There is no hangar..

One thing is certain, and that is that such a ship would have universality; cruise missiles, anti-ship, anti-submarine warfare, close and medium range air defense system + GUN.
And that is EXACTLY what I like.

From what I understand no more of these were built to fullfill the request by Vietnamese Navy because of no more engines from Ukraine.

lancelot wrote:From what I understand no more of these were built to fullfill the request by Vietnamese Navy because of no more engines from Ukraine.

Yeah the Vietnamese Navy wanted (and ordered) at least two more of them.

Possibly these new mods are with the new engines from Saturn...

To Rodion....

One M55R gas turbine has 27500 hp, while two M-70 (project 11661) turbines have a total of 29000 hp or so.

It needs a hangar for the helicopter.

The problem is solved and the Russians have released the basic features and specifications for the Gepard 3.9 guard ships...
It turned out that the mockup foresees the installation of 3 UKSK and not two as I wrote and one for 9K96 Redut and not two as I wrote. That's what I find strange and I don't like it. I am of the opinion that two UKSK and two 9K96 Redut launchers..
It is also planned to install Paket-NK on the ship, as well as the installation of the "Palma" close air defense system.
Two diesel engines of 10,000 kilowatts per engine would be responsible for powering the ship.

With its 102m having two UKSK is already good. Redut is taking just as much space and needs radars as well additional control station and additional crew. Could work but don't expect long deployements.

Well to be fair the new model UKSK launchers can also carry surface to air missiles too, so by having a third UKSK launcher you can mix and match your load depending on the situation.

According to this image:



Each tube can carry a single 9M96 missile (140km or 60km range model), or one Shtil-1 naval BUK missile, four 9M100 per tube or the last tube is a single 40N6 400km range SAM.

That means you could load up one UKSK launcher with 8 x 400km range SAMs or 8 x 140km or 8 x 60km range or 32 short range CIWS 9M100 missiles, in addition to any missiles in the SAM launchers.

That doesn't change what I said. Redut take almost same space as uksk. And You still needs radars and dedicated control stations even if you fit AD missiles in uksk.

This is a good solution for a green water navy. Or for local deployements like in Syria. But not for a blue water force.

Podlodka77 wrote:The problem is solved and the Russians have released the basic features and specifications for the Gepard 3.9 guard ships...
It turned out that the mockup foresees the installation of 3 UKSK and not two as I wrote and one for 9K96 Redut and not two as I wrote. That's what I find strange and I don't like it. I am of the opinion that two UKSK and two 9K96 Redut launchers..
It is also planned to install Paket-NK on the ship, as well as the installation of the "Palma" close air defense system.
Two diesel engines of 10,000 kilowatts per engine would be responsible for powering the ship.

Look at the thing from perspective, again.
It is about the size of Saar6.
Does not look bad at all from the perspective, and the perspective is one of the most modern frigates out there.
Will operate from closed seas/internal waters, covered with on shore AD assets.
It is a missile carrier.
And with both Redut and double Palma, it is hell of AD weaponry on board I would say.
My question is if it gets the Vinetka towed antenna or only underkeel Zarya - a combination was offered with export Gepard class for a while.

It is a nice, versatile ship with a strong push toward land attack role.

This is only a model, but also a ship that has a greater striking power than even the first 4 frigates of the Gorshkov project.
As many as 3 UKSK launchers are in the picture of the model.
I would rather go for two UKSK and two launchers for the air defense system, but who am I to decide..
The ship definitely has sonar, but also the "Paket-NK" system, which the frigate 11356R does not have.
The highest sailing speed of 24 knots is low, but no more can be expected from an engine with a total power of 20,000 kilowatts.

The striking power of such a ship would definitely be great. Finally, the Russians would get another ship with decent anti-submarine capabilities. And air defense is solid, while there are apparently no helicopters. And that's about it.

Podlodka77 wrote:The problem is solved and the Russians have released the basic features and specifications for the Gepard 3.9 guard ships...
It turned out that the mockup foresees the installation of 3 UKSK and not two as I wrote and one for 9K96 Redut and not two as I wrote. That's what I find strange and I don't like it. I am of the opinion that two UKSK and two 9K96 Redut launchers..
It is also planned to install Paket-NK on the ship, as well as the installation of the "Palma" close air defense system.
Two diesel engines of 10,000 kilowatts per engine would be responsible for powering the ship.

IMO 6 of these would have been a better value then the 22160 class.

Both serve different roles.

The Caspian Sea should be covered by a lot of land based air defense - be it fighter aircraft or SAMs. That negates the need for Redut to a large degree.

BUT Vietnam or other potential export customers could do with a dedicated air defense variant.

Redut take almost same space as uksk.

But Redut is less flexible than UKSK at the moment.

Redut carries one 9M96 missile or four 9M100 missiles per tube, but so does UKSK.

The difference is that UKSK can also carry a range of other missiles and equipment too including land attack and anti ship as well as anti sub weapons all of which would be useful too.

And You still needs radars and dedicated control stations even if you fit AD missiles in uksk.

The newer SAMs are ARH and probably just need datalink communications and target updates rather than their own dedicated radars.

This is a good solution for a green water navy. Or for local deployements like in Syria. But not for a blue water force.

Being a frigate that is just sensible isn't it?

And with both Redut and double Palma, it is hell of AD weaponry on board I would say.

Both systems together give it air defence performance levels approaching that of modern British destroyers... and if you load SAMs in two of its UKSK launchers it could be rather better armed with 8 Zircon missiles and 16 x 400km range SAMs and you have Palma and Redut...

I would rather go for two UKSK and two launchers for the air defense system, but who am I to decide..

If the UKSK launchers can also carry SAMs then it would make more sense to have three of them.

IMO 6 of these would have been a better value then the 22160 class.

The Buyan is a pirate hunter designed to operate for long periods away from Russian waters... a different type of ship.

I suspect the Buyan would also be interesting developed up to Frigate size as an escort type ship to support Russian trade around the world without spending too much money on huge numbers of destroyers and cruisers.

Being a frigate that is just sensible isn't it?

Steregoushchy is 4m longer and is just a corvette.

Weapons are not the only thing that matter. For long deployement internal space is precious. If your crew isn't confortable, they won't sleep well and won't do their work well and conflicts will happen for a yes or a no.

Call it a frigate if you want that doesn't change the fact it isn't meant for a blue water navy.