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


    P-500 Bazalt / P-1000 Vulcan

    Big_Gazza
    Big_Gazza

    Posts : 2103
    Points : 2105
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    P-500 Bazalt / P-1000 Vulcan - Page 2 Empty Re: P-500 Bazalt / P-1000 Vulcan

    Post  Big_Gazza on Fri Sep 11, 2020 2:18 pm

    George1 wrote:Modernized P-1000 Vulkan missiles with range up to 1000 km installed in Marshal Ustinov Slava class cruiser

    https://navy-korabel.livejournal.com/248867.html

    I really don't understand those people who think the Moskva and Varyag shouldn't be similarly upgraded. Armed with 16x P-1000s these big boys are each capable for gutting a CBG from 1000kms distance.  They are worthy of respect and their simple presence in a defending fleet with give the Seppostanis a few sleepless nights.

    Upgrading Ustinov = money well spent
    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 6413
    Points : 6405
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    P-500 Bazalt / P-1000 Vulcan - Page 2 Empty Re: P-500 Bazalt / P-1000 Vulcan

    Post  Isos on Fri Sep 11, 2020 3:02 pm

    P-500/700/1000 are easy targets for modern air defences. They are huge and their speed are not enough to go through anymore. Mach 2 isn't that good anymore.

    The S-300 on them are less capable than Gorshkov's poliment/redut, specially against attacks from multiple sides because they have just one tracking radar.

    Their modernization would need to include angled uksk, a new mast with 4 phased array radar and add 48N6/9M96 missiles. A real modernization.

    With 2 modernized Kirov, 3 Slava, Udaloys with UKSK and Oscars/Akulas also with kalibrs that would make them a very potent task group against modern navies.
    Big_Gazza
    Big_Gazza

    Posts : 2103
    Points : 2105
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    P-500 Bazalt / P-1000 Vulcan - Page 2 Empty Re: P-500 Bazalt / P-1000 Vulcan

    Post  Big_Gazza on Fri Sep 11, 2020 3:32 pm

    Isos wrote:P-500/700/1000 are easy targets for modern air defences. They are huge and their speed are not enough to go through anymore. Mach 2 isn't that good anymore.

    The S-300 on them are less capable than Gorshkov's poliment/redut, specially against attacks from multiple sides because they have just one tracking radar.

    Their modernization would need to include angled uksk, a new mast with 4 phased array radar and add 48N6/9M96 missiles. A real modernization.

    With 2 modernized Kirov, 3 Slava, Udaloys with UKSK and Oscars/Akulas also with kalibrs that would make them a very potent task group against modern navies.

    You're assuming that the only possible targets for P-500/1000 are a fully-functional USN CBG. There are plenty of potential adversaries that don't have the USN AD to hide behind.  In any case, against the USN the obvious tactic is to degrade the Seppo flotilla defenses with the more modern hypersonics and supersonics (and torpedos) and then move in for the coup de grace with the big CVN busters. No matter US arrogance, its always easier to attack a large ship on the open ocean than it is to defend, and against mass use of modern hypersonics i don't see the USN defenses as credible.

    A single tracking radar for Fort-M is hardly a problem given it is a long range system. You point it at where the enemy is... if the RuN commanders are dumb enough to place themselves between multiple enemy carrier forces then part of me thinks they deserve what they get..

    The modernisation you suggest would suck in a veritable fuck-ton of cash that would be better spent on new ships. They simply need to be able to operate with the new ships and integrated combat systems to take advantage of a distributed battleground and remote sensors. They don't need to be technologically equal to the 22350s. They just need to be able to work with them and carry around a big salvo of carrier killers. They are best considered as a 2nd echelon vessel to support the modern ships.
    The-thing-next-door
    The-thing-next-door

    Posts : 854
    Points : 902
    Join date : 2017-09-18
    Location : Uranus

    P-500 Bazalt / P-1000 Vulcan - Page 2 Empty Re: P-500 Bazalt / P-1000 Vulcan

    Post  The-thing-next-door on Fri Sep 11, 2020 5:08 pm

    Considering how the west was always so sure that they could easily counter the P15 Termit, and how many humiliating failures they
    experienced tyring to do so, I would not so readily discard the Vulkans.
    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 6413
    Points : 6405
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    P-500 Bazalt / P-1000 Vulcan - Page 2 Empty Re: P-500 Bazalt / P-1000 Vulcan

    Post  Isos on Fri Sep 11, 2020 5:37 pm

    There are plenty of potential adversaries that don't have the USN AD to hide behind

    Modern frigates like Gorshkov or FREMM have 32 AD missiles that have almost 100% Pk against such big rcs target (unless if they have some jammers and chaffs). That enough to counter 2 Slava. Russia has only 3.

    With UKSK they could have 64 oniks/zirkon for each ship.


    A single tracking radar for Fort-M is hardly a problem given it is a long range system.

    It is and they don't have fort-M but Fort system with 5V55 missiles with less range than 9m96.

    Also if they are fighting a US carrier they will face f-18 launching each 4 harpoons from outsude Fort's engagement zone and it will detect the missile 30km away with tracking maybe even less than that. That gives sime of the missiles enough time to reach the ship. Then it's up to the Osa and Ak-630 to deal with them.

    The modernisation you suggest would suck in a veritable fuck-ton of cash that would be better spent on new ships.

    Yes if they modernize the mast and the Fort sytem. The anti ship missile launcher are outside the hull and their switch for angled UKSK cab be cheap and easy. Just need some new wiring and a fire control station which just a computer.
    Big_Gazza
    Big_Gazza

    Posts : 2103
    Points : 2105
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    P-500 Bazalt / P-1000 Vulcan - Page 2 Empty Re: P-500 Bazalt / P-1000 Vulcan

    Post  Big_Gazza on Fri Sep 11, 2020 6:33 pm

    Modern frigates like Gorshkov or FREMM have 32 AD missiles that have almost 100% Pk against such big rcs target (unless if they have some jammers and chaffs). That enough to counter 2 Slava. Russia has only 3.

    With UKSK they could have 64 oniks/zirkon for each ship.

    Shooting down a dozen incoming M2.5 AShMs tearing across the sea at 10m altitude is not a trivial feat.  Shooting down a concerted salvo of such weapons in real combat isn't like a carefully choreographed test against a known "enemy" ie a single target drone that doesn't carry ECM and pen aids and without multiple attack vectors (ie some sticking to low altitude, some popping up, and some coming in high and attacking from near zenith).  The great thing about these big boys is that only one needs to get thru and its game over red rover...

    It is and they don't have fort-M but Fort system with 5V55 missiles with less range than 9m96.

    Also if they are fighting a US carrier they will face f-18 launching each 4 harpoons from outsude Fort's engagement zone and it will detect the missile 30km away with tracking maybe even less than that. That gives sime of the missiles enough time to reach the ship. Then it's up to the Osa and Ak-630 to deal with them.

    OK, I stand corrected - Fort not Fort-M.  Even so, you are saying that subsonic harpoons fired from F-18s are a dire threat, yet M2.5 AShMs can simply be mopped up with ease according to your 1st paragraph...  You can't even manage to be consistent.   Laughing   BTW Slavas won't be alone, but will be operating with modern fleet elements.  They are there to field the Carrier Killers, and while capable of self defense they will have modern escorts.

    Yes if they modernize the mast and the Fort sytem. The anti ship missile launcher are outside the hull and their switch for angled UKSK cab be cheap and easy. Just need some new wiring and a fire control station which just a computer.

    Buddy, I'm a systems engineer with a offshore background and I'll tell you straight up that such an upgrade will not be cheap and it won't be easy.  You're trivializing it all because you can't conceive of the real-world complexities.

    Would I like to see a few Slavas with deep modernisation and stuffed to the gunnels with new gear?  Sure, who wouldn't?  Is it the best use of cash? No, and that's the issue.  Modernisations should stick to fixing the non-glamorous stuff like sensors and communications and battle management.  Older weapon systems like P-500/1000 can still be brutally effective as part of a balanced fighting force.
    kvs
    kvs

    Posts : 7058
    Points : 7207
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Canuckistan

    P-500 Bazalt / P-1000 Vulcan - Page 2 Empty Re: P-500 Bazalt / P-1000 Vulcan

    Post  kvs on Fri Sep 11, 2020 6:44 pm

    It's always the one note Johnny BS with these clowns. Russian vaccines are dangerous and stolen. Russian robotic tanks are dangerous (alter to be claimed as stolen). The Burevestnik is
    dangerous to Russians and ineffective against NATzO wunderwaffen. American subsonic missiles are vastly more effective than supersonic and hypersonic Russian missiles. NATzO
    has been jamming (LOL) S-300 and S-400 systems.

    All of this fanboi crap is taken from retarded commercials like the one using CGI kills of T-14s by some new Bell attack helicopters. Because missiles don't do the job, it is the launch
    platform!

    Tiresome waste of time these "discussions". Teaching ignorant fanbois the basics over and over to have them totally disregard being corrected and repeating the same chauvinist drivel.
    Very much like "debating" climate change deniers. The Gish galloping clowns have no intention of engaging in any rational discourse using real information.

    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 6413
    Points : 6405
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    P-500 Bazalt / P-1000 Vulcan - Page 2 Empty Re: P-500 Bazalt / P-1000 Vulcan

    Post  Isos on Fri Sep 11, 2020 7:39 pm

    OK, I stand corrected - Fort not Fort-M.  Even so, you are saying that subsonic harpoons fired from F-18s are a dire threat, yet M2.5 AShMs can simply be mopped up with ease according to your 1st paragraph...  You can't even manage to be consistent.   Laughing   BTW Slavas won't be alone, but will be operating with modern fleet elements.  They are there to field the Carrier Killers, and while capable of self defense they will have modern escorts.

    I am consistent. I said they are innefective against modern air defence systems because they have huge rcs and their speed isn't an issue anymore as those western sytems like Aster have shown to be able to intercept such targets.

    They also have much better radars that allow to engage 360°.

    I also said Fort has just one targeting radar so if it faces right and deal with 4 harpoons that will show on its radar just 30km away (if they are lucky and in good weather) it can't deal with the other 4 harpoons coming from the left which will have to he destroyed by Osa and ak-630.

    They won't be alone, I agree. I was justing pointing out that the ships and its sytems are old and not adapted for new threats.

    Would I like to see a few Slavas with deep modernisation and stuffed to the gunnels with new gear?  Sure, who wouldn't?  Is it the best use of cash? No, and that's the issue.

    They are upgrading Kirovs. Upgraded Slava wouldn't be far away in terms of weapons power and capacity.

    They would have 64 UKSK angled cells, 10 torpedoes with also kalibr and 64 S-300PMU2 with a 4 phased arry radar and a max of 4x64 = 256 ARH 9m96 against saturating attacks.

    That's like 5 Gorshkov in one ship.

    They still don't have any project to replace them.

    Their modernization is worth the money.

    All of this fanboi crap is taken from retarded commercials like the one using CGI kills of T-14s by some new Bell attack helicopters. Because missiles don't do the job, it is the launch
    platform!

    You are the only fanboy here. Not my fault if you are frustrated that a french ship from 2012 can destroy a russian cruiser from the 80s.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 26273
    Points : 26819
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    P-500 Bazalt / P-1000 Vulcan - Page 2 Empty Re: P-500 Bazalt / P-1000 Vulcan

    Post  GarryB on Sat Sep 12, 2020 8:53 am

    P-500/700/1000 are easy targets for modern air defences. They are huge and their speed are not enough to go through anymore. Mach 2 isn't that good anymore.

    They were never intended to be fired one at a time at anything... and their physical size means they actually are the size of small fighter aircraft... the amount of active and passive jammers that can be fitted to them has probably only massively increased.

    Obviously they are not good enough to be the standard AShW for the Russian Navy, but they aren't...

    The S-300 on them are less capable than Gorshkov's poliment/redut, specially against attacks from multiple sides because they have just one tracking radar.

    I doubt they will still be using 1980s SAM missile stocks... physically the S-300 missiles fitted to these ships are the same size as the new S-400 250km and 400km range missiles.... the main difference of course is the electronics... which I believe is being upgraded with this upgrade...

    Their modernization would need to include angled uksk, a new mast with 4 phased array radar and add 48N6/9M96 missiles. A real modernization.

    They could keep the Vulkans and just upgrade the radars and SAMs and still be a potent ship... I doubt they are going to try to keep these ships in service more than 20-30 years...

    With 2 modernized Kirov, 3 Slava, Udaloys with UKSK and Oscars/Akulas also with kalibrs that would make them a very potent task group against modern navies.

    With 80 Zircons potentially on each of those Kirovs, I don't think having three lots of 16 Vulkans is that much of a drawback...

    They are going to have plenty of heavy anti ship missiles either way.

    Modern frigates like Gorshkov or FREMM have 32 AD missiles that have almost 100% Pk against such big rcs target (unless if they have some jammers and chaffs). That enough to counter 2 Slava. Russia has only 3.

    With UKSK they could have 64 oniks/zirkon for each ship.

    One nuclear armed Vulkan at 40km altitude should be enough to get directly above any western frigate or destroyer or cruiser and then have it dive down with a proximity fuse that detonates the nuke a fraction of a second before any interceptor hits it... after that airburst I doubt any ship will be in any condition to deal with the next two or three...

    It is and they don't have fort-M but Fort system with 5V55 missiles with less range than 9m96.

    That is what they had when they were in service and the newer larger missiles did not exist. Now they do, so the chance to upgrade is there if they want it.

    I suspect they don't want to spend too much on this upgrade.


    Also if they are fighting a US carrier they will face f-18 launching each 4 harpoons from outsude Fort's engagement zone and it will detect the missile 30km away with tracking maybe even less than that. That gives sime of the missiles enough time to reach the ship. Then it's up to the Osa and Ak-630 to deal with them.

    OSA? You mean TOR... and that is what it is designed for...

    The anti ship missile launcher are outside the hull and their switch for angled UKSK cab be cheap and easy. Just need some new wiring and a fire control station which just a computer.
    Based on the post above it sounds like they are upgrading the Vulkan missiles, which likely includes the same improved fuel they are using in Onyx to double its range and increase its speed to mach 5. They have said the missiles range is now 1,000km... the speed might be higher as well, and I suspect all the electronics have been upgraded too...

    That was probably plan B to the angled launchers...

    OK, I stand corrected - Fort not Fort-M. Even so, you are saying that subsonic harpoons fired from F-18s are a dire threat, yet M2.5 AShMs can simply be mopped up with ease according to your 1st paragraph... You can't even manage to be consistent. Laughing BTW Slavas won't be alone, but will be operating with modern fleet elements. They are there to field the Carrier Killers, and while capable of self defense they will have modern escorts.

    And that is a good point... the older heavier missiles were slower, but they carried bigger warheads that would be more effective against large ships, so new fuel extending range and new electronics but still a big warhead would mean Zircon from Kirovs zipping in and taking out the AEGIS cruisers, would leave the carriers poorly defended for the mach 2+ Vulkans arriving later than the mach 10 Zircons...

    I am consistent. I said they are innefective against modern air defence systems because they have huge rcs and their speed isn't an issue anymore as those western sytems like Aster have shown to be able to intercept such targets.

    If the missiles and the cruisers were brand new from scratch designs I would agree, but this is an old ship getting an upgrade... a space filler and an old but very capable missile getting an upgrade too.

    The increase in range is about double the original range and those missiles were packed with fuel so I doubt they have found a way to double the fuel capacity, which suggests they are using higher energy fuel that gives them a significant increase in speed without a significant increase in fuel consumption... double the speed with the same fuel burn rate gives you double the range... same for Onyx... hint hint...

    They could have replaced the old electronics with new stuff and increased capacity a little, and improved guidance precision would mean a slightly smaller warhead could be used, but I would be very surprised if this was still a Mach 2 missile... and even if it wasn't they were designed to operate in a pack with one missile climbing to get radar information on the targets and sharing the information with the low flying missiles in the group below the radar horizon...

    I also said Fort has just one targeting radar so if it faces right and deal with 4 harpoons that will show on its radar just 30km away (if they are lucky and in good weather) it can't deal with the other 4 harpoons coming from the left which will have to he destroyed by Osa and ak-630.

    Part of the electronics upgrade might include some fairly decent radars for the ship itself that could be used to detect targets at much greater range than then old set could manage, and pass data on to the air defence systems of the ship.

    BTW even if they only replace Klintok with improved TOR and AK-630 with Duet, the CIWS capacity will go from very good to excellent...

    They won't be alone, I agree. I was justing pointing out that the ships and its sytems are old and not adapted for new threats.

    If they make it too powerful there will be no reason to replace it with a new state of the art cruiser in 8-15 years...

    They are upgrading Kirovs. Upgraded Slava wouldn't be far away in terms of weapons power and capacity.

    The Kirovs were the worlds first ships to carry decent numbers of vertically launched missiles of all types so replacing old model vertical launch missiles with newer ones is easy in comparison.

    Their modernization is worth the money.

    They are modernising them.... we really don't know what their plans are and what their options are either, so we can't say what is or isn't worth the money...

    You are the only fanboy here. Not my fault if you are frustrated that a french ship from 2012 can destroy a russian cruiser from the 80s.

    Dude... A Russian corvette can sink any ship in the French navy so having a cruiser that is not the deathstar is not a huge issue.


    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 6413
    Points : 6405
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    P-500 Bazalt / P-1000 Vulcan - Page 2 Empty Re: P-500 Bazalt / P-1000 Vulcan

    Post  Isos on Sat Sep 12, 2020 10:42 am

    OSA? You mean TOR... and that is what it is designed for...

    No Slavas have two Osa launchers on the side of the hangar. There is no Tor on them.

    Frankly I doubt Osa could do anything against a modern antiship missiles in terminal attack.

    Dude... A Russian corvette can sink any ship in the French navy so having a cruiser that is not the deathstar is not a huge issue.

    You overestimate russian missiles. French Aster can intercept both kalibr and oniks and French are better informed than you on russian weapon/stuff.

    Zirkon is still not ready and we still don't know about it's real capability. Mach 10 is good but it will be at very high altitude, as soon as it dives it will get much slowler and create plasma around it and that creates lot of issues for detecting enemy ship.

    They were saying oniks is a mach 3 missiles when in fact it was just mach 2 at low altitude.

    They are modernising them.... we really don't know what their plans are and what their options are either, so we can't say what is or isn't worth the money...

    They were supposed to be retired when they would get a new Lider class. This whole Lider project beung just a dream they are upgrading them untill they get Gorshkov-M which will also take another 10-20 years.

    They upgrade them because they have no other option.
    The-thing-next-door
    The-thing-next-door

    Posts : 854
    Points : 902
    Join date : 2017-09-18
    Location : Uranus

    P-500 Bazalt / P-1000 Vulcan - Page 2 Empty Re: P-500 Bazalt / P-1000 Vulcan

    Post  The-thing-next-door on Sat Sep 12, 2020 1:27 pm

    Isos wrote:

    You are the only fanboy here. Not my fault if you are frustrated that a french ship from 2012 can destroy a russian cruiser from the 80s.

    If you seriously believe that then you need help.

    Your frigates might have a slight chance of surviving a salvo, but sinking an Atlant.... How the bloody hell do you think your little frigates with their point blank range, obsolete ASHMs that are derived from 1970s examples would ever hope to sink an Atlant?


    You overestimate russian missiles. French Aster can intercept both kalibr and oniks and French are better informed than you on russian weapon/stuff.

    Zirkon is still not ready and we still don't know about it's real capability. Mach 10 is good but it will be at very high altitude, as soon as it dives it will get much slowler and create plasma around it and that creates lot of issues for detecting enemy ship.

    They were saying oniks is a mach 3 missiles when in fact it was just mach 2 at low altitude.

    The only thing you achieve by making such claims is insulting your nation.

    Westerner's have always been confident in their ability to shoot down Russian ASHMs from the 60's when they thought that they could do it with old 40mm bofors guns to the 90's when they were still failing to hit bloody P-15 Termits, Why should anyone believe some little froggy PR representative claiming that their pathetic little missile industry has created a system that can defend against the best ASHMs on the bloody planet.

    When it comes to anti missile warfare only Russia has shown consistent results, consistently successful that is, the west typically achieves the opposite results quite consistently.

    Compared to your exocet the Oniks has superior, range, lethality and speed.

    The idea the the minute MIC of a small and declined country like France could hope to compete with Russian missile industry is nothing short of retarded.

    kvs and Hole like this post

    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 6413
    Points : 6405
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    P-500 Bazalt / P-1000 Vulcan - Page 2 Empty Re: P-500 Bazalt / P-1000 Vulcan

    Post  Isos on Sat Sep 12, 2020 2:22 pm

    Exocet proved to do the job. P-1000 proved nothing yet, only during tests. Neither did oniks. A FREMM would intercept all of the salvo fired by a Slava.

    The slava could face 8 exocets at a time with 4 coming from the right and 4 from the left.

    Westerner's have always been confident in their ability to shoot down Russian ASHMs from the 60's when they thought that they could do it with old 40mm bofors guns to the 90's when they were still failing to hit bloody P-15 Termits, Why should anyone believe some little froggy PR representative claiming that their pathetic little missile industry has created a system that can defend against the best ASHMs on the bloody planet.

    Western subsonic missiles like exocet and harpoon have send to the bottom tens of soviet made ships equiped with ak-630 that were supposed to be enough against such missiles.

    P-15 were jammed by israeli pretty easy back in the 70s. The only ships it managed to destroy was ones equiped with WW2 guns.

    Soviet hurried up to make a copy of harpoon/exocet after the Malvinas war after seeing how good the exocet was.

    Aster was proven to be capable to intercept mach 3 low flying targets. Oniks is in fact mach 2 and not mach 3 as some here say. I don't say Oniks sucks I say P-1000/500/700 are outdated and having 16 of them is useless when they could have 64 uksk.

    The idea the the minute MIC of a small and declined country like France could hope to compete with Russian missile industry is nothing short of retarded.

    The joke.

    Poliment/redut is a copy of Aster system deployed in 2001.

    French and chinese are taking all the market of russian MIC. All the traditional clients are buying more and more from them instead from Russia. In 20 years they will be left with african countries only.

    French can build frigates in decent time.

    Russia needed help from France to make heli carrier.

    Russia begs france for the engine of its helicopters and also for the engines if its SSJ100.

    What did France buy from Russia ? Raw materials.
    The-thing-next-door
    The-thing-next-door

    Posts : 854
    Points : 902
    Join date : 2017-09-18
    Location : Uranus

    P-500 Bazalt / P-1000 Vulcan - Page 2 Empty Re: P-500 Bazalt / P-1000 Vulcan

    Post  The-thing-next-door on Sat Sep 12, 2020 5:58 pm

    Isos wrote:Exocet proved to do the job. P-1000 proved nothing yet, only during tests. Neither did oniks. A FREMM would intercept all of the salvo fired by a Slava.

    Proven does not mean good, only that it has been used a few times.

    Does the T-14 Armata need to go kill a few helpless separatists to be considered the best tank in the world?



    Western subsonic missiles like exocet and harpoon have send to the bottom tens of soviet made ships equiped with ak-630 that were supposed to be enough against such missiles.


    Western gun based CIWS systems have failed to shoot down P-15s and they do not have the excuse of foreign operators.

    P-15 were jammed by israeli pretty easy back in the 70s. The only ships it managed to destroy was ones equiped with WW2 guns.

    We are talking about shooting missiles down, the ability to jam a P-15 is irrelevant to this, the inability to destroy it is.

    Soviet hurried up to make a copy of harpoon/exocet after the Malvinas war after seeing how good the exocet was.

    Copy? How dare you insult the vastly superior and far more technologically advanced Russian missiles, the first "copy" of your pathetic exocet that comes to mind is the Moskit, a missile with far greater range and a significantly bigger warhead, it also uses ramjet propulsion instead of a primitive solid fuel rocket motor.

    Aster was proven to be capable to intercept mach 3 low flying targets. Oniks is in fact mach 2 and not mach 3 as some here say. I don't say Oniks sucks I say P-1000/500/700 are outdated and having 16 of them is useless when they could have 64 uksk.

    Wow it can hit target drones in ideal conditions while they are flying in a straight line, so could the S-75 Dvina.

    Poliment/redut is a copy of Aster system deployed in 2001.


    What was copied, the idea of a compact vertical launch SAM system?

    French and chinese are taking all the market of russian MIC. All the traditional clients are buying more and more from them instead from Russia. In 20 years they will be left with african countries only.

    And when they realise that your trash is inadequate they will come crying back to Russia.

    French can build frigates in decent time.

    How many do you think you could build per year if your engine factories broke away from France and rusted away?

    The current order of 15 Gorshkovs will be sufficient to wipe out all navies in europe on its own and your few primitive ballistic missile subs are easy targets.

    Russia needed help from France to make heli carrier.

    They have not received any and found your designs to be only barely adequate.

    Russia begs france for the engine of its helicopters and also for the engines if its SSJ100.


    Foreign customers who are dumb will request non Russian engines, the Russian military seems to prefer not relying on inferior engines it cannot guarantee it will ever get replacement parts for.

    kvs and Hole like this post

    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 6413
    Points : 6405
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    P-500 Bazalt / P-1000 Vulcan - Page 2 Empty Re: P-500 Bazalt / P-1000 Vulcan

    Post  Isos on Sat Sep 12, 2020 6:31 pm

    Proven does not mean good, only that it has been used a few times.

    Does the T-14 Armata need to go kill a few helpless separatists to be considered the best tank in the world?

    Yes it means.

    What I've seen from aramata is numbers on random forums. So yeah it must prove itself.

    On paper russian atgm are more than good yet we saw in a exopsition where they had time to prepare themselves that the missiles had a Pk of around 50%.

    Western gun based CIWS systems have failed to shoot down P-15s and they do not have the excuse of foreign operators.

    Which one ? When did that happen ? Only story I know are the use against israeli and pakistani ships equiped with no defences.

    Foreign operator are trained by soviets and its sovuet systems.

    Argentinian Exocets were made by french, their Super Etandard were made by french and their pilots were trained by french. They managed to destroy with 6 or so missiles 2 or 3 ships of the UK navy.

    We are talking about shooting missiles down, the ability to jam a P-15 is irrelevant to this, the inability to destroy it is.

    Jamm it correctly and it misses your ship and falls in the water. It shot it down.

    What missiles was intercepted by a siviet system ? Could they engage an exocet flying at 5m or spot it ? No.

    There is no need for weapons if russian missiles are easily jammed.

    Aster proved to be capable to deal with supersonic missiles. Just like S-300 could destroy exocet but I was pointing out that slava has just one engagement radar and can face an attack which involves multiple side attacks.

    Copy? How dare you insult the vastly superior and far more technologically advanced Russian missiles, the first "copy" of your pathetic exocet that comes to mind is the Moskit, a missile with far greater range and a significantly bigger warhead, it also uses ramjet propulsion instead of a primitive solid fuel rocket motor.

    Kh-35 which is used on Steregoushchy which is the first modern design after USSR fall. Total copy.

    Wow it can hit target drones in ideal conditions while they are flying in a straight line, so could the S-75 Dvina.

    WOW russian missiles can hit a barge full of containers with no air def and no jammers. WOW. I mean WOW.

    The drone at least immitates some caracteristics of the missiles.

    Russian antiship missiles are just proven against a barge.

    What was copied, the idea of a compact vertical launch SAM system?

    360° engagement. 2 sorts of missiles: medium and long range. Active radar seaker. Standardized 8 cells VLS.

    And Aster has the pifpaf mode which makes it the best missile system of its category.


    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 26273
    Points : 26819
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    P-500 Bazalt / P-1000 Vulcan - Page 2 Empty Re: P-500 Bazalt / P-1000 Vulcan

    Post  GarryB on Sun Sep 13, 2020 11:37 am

    No Slavas have two Osa launchers on the side of the hangar. There is no Tor on them.

    Osa is no longer in production and would have to be replaced... which means either improved TOR or Pantsir-SM.

    Frankly I doubt Osa could do anything against a modern antiship missiles in terminal attack.

    Osa is just a command guided missile that is perfectly good at shooting down subsonic low flying targets, I would think against Tomahawk and NSW or what ever it is called and Harpoon it would actually be very effective.

    I doubt it will be retained however.


    You overestimate russian missiles. French Aster can intercept both kalibr and oniks and French are better informed than you on russian weapon/stuff.

    Or do you underestimate them like the British did in the Falklands... they weren't scared of French Exocet missiles.... they had them in service and knew them inside out... and the very idea that Argentine pilots would fly in and use the radar returns from the islands themselves to attack ships with iron bombs is just stupid... except when that is just what they did...

    The Russians have very large numbers of missiles compared with the number of HATO ships... not everyone has to make it through for them to be effective... the Soviets and Russians practise against their own missiles which creates a circle of improvements to missiles and improvements to defence systems... which I would suspect an American would say is operating several levels above what they have in the west.

    Zirkon is still not ready and we still don't know about it's real capability. Mach 10 is good but it will be at very high altitude, as soon as it dives it will get much slowler and create plasma around it and that creates lot of issues for detecting enemy ship.

    Why do you think it will get slower as it dives?

    The Kh-22M is reported to move at mach 5 when it dives, which is pretty good for a missile that flies to its target area at mach 3.5.

    They were saying oniks is a mach 3 missiles when in fact it was just mach 2 at low altitude.

    There are mach 3.2 aircraft that are faster than the Onyx, but at sea level they are not supersonic... the air density at very low altitude makes supersonic flight energy intensive... I don't know of any version of Onyx that is designed to be sea skimming simply because that would limit its flight speed to about mach 2.2 or so, while flying at altitude it could move much faster.

    The point is, the Russians knew decades ago that with an aircraft carrier operating with US ships that there is a very good chance they will detect even low flying missiles at great distances.... flying at 10m altitude only makes sense when you are after a single ship limited by its radar horizon... if there is a carrier there with an AWACS plane or even the Kuznetsov with a MiG-29KR that detects your Tomahawk 150km away from your ship any Russian ship can then simply launch a 9M96E missile (with a range of 150km and ARH) that can fly out and get target course corrections via the fighter monitoring the target and hit it well beyond any distance the ship could detect it itself... if there are ten missiles then two ships can launch four missiles each and the fighter itself can launch two AAMs to bring the threat missiles down.

    The Russians realised however if you replace those Tomahawks with Kh-32 flying at 40km altitude at mach 4.5 the fighter planes and perhaps even the ships will detect these incoming weapons at enormous ranges, but a MiG-29KR or an F-35 or Hornet or Rafale for that matter doesn't carry anything that could get near such a target so it flys over the planes... the ships might spot it too but until the threat gets to about 200 or 300km away there is nothing at all they can do about it... even when they get to 200km away what ship based SAM can engage such threats... anti ballistic missiles are not ideal in this case because although the flight speeds should be covered the fact that it is a flying target that can manouver and when it detects incoming ARH SAMS and the radars of US ships it will start to manouver and become very difficult targets to engage.

    The Zircon will likely be flying at similar or greater heights and twice as fast and is being tested now to go into service...

    They were supposed to be retired when they would get a new Lider class.

    They really don't know what they want or need, the new ships they are building now are being changed and made heavier and are getting different armament options.

    Upgrading the Slavas and Kirovs is a planned thing... they want to test some ideas and likely new big sensors and equipment that wont fit on smaller ships... they can test a 152mm gun for instance, and they can test new large AESA antenna arrays for new weapons that the bigger ships will carry, and of course all sorts of command and communications equipment they can test and learn from that will go towards making sure their first new destroyers and new cruisers are not like Zumwalts and Fords... ie too ambitious and too untried...

    The idea of a very long range gun is a good idea... the fact that they screwed it up is not a surprise... they need to start with a 70km or 100km range gun and work their way up.

    This whole Lider project beung just a dream they are upgrading them untill they get Gorshkov-M which will also take another 10-20 years.

    Lider was a concept, and being a concept was based on what they wanted when things started. With experience of building smaller ships their understanding and expectations will have changed... they will likely change further after their upgraded cruisers hit the water and get some real world experience...

    I suspect they will make the new ones rather smaller than the old ones and they wont fill them packed in tight with as many missile tubes as they can shoe horn in because if you want to create an arsenal ship with lots of missiles ready to fire it is much simpler and cheaper to adapt a few container ships to that purpose than clutter your warships that all that rubbish and make them uncomfortable hell holes to man and operate.

    They will get to test new systems used in these upgrades and they will get some experience of long voyages which they haven't had in a while, so the new designs they get around to be building will be much more useful and suitable than they would be if they built them first based on Lider fantasies.

    There is nothing wrong with Lider as a concept... you have to start somewhere, but putting everything brand new in a large ship is asking for a Ford or Zumwalt type situation... which Russia does not need.

    A dumb guy learns from experience, because experience can kill you... the smart guy learns from the experience of others and works out what should work for him without so much risk.

    They upgrade them because they have no other option.

    Not true... they are still using Vulkan and they could probably dig out enough old weapons from stocks to keep them working... they have to plan for WWIII but as they wont be part of either winning or losing WWIII it doesn't matter if they have 5 old cruisers, 5 upgraded cruisers or broke the bank and had 12 brand new from scratch design new stealth cruisers right now... everybody still loses if there is a WWIII... I would expect that is patently obvious.

    The idea the the minute MIC of a small and declined country like France could hope to compete with Russian missile industry is nothing short of retarded.

    I disagree... any MIC can create a work of art design that is just really good and world class. Conversely I think there is no MIC in the world that makes everything that is the best... not Russian and not the US and not even the whole west.

    Exocet proved to do the job. P-1000 proved nothing yet, only during tests. Neither did oniks. A FREMM would intercept all of the salvo fired by a Slava.

    The Exocet proved the British Naval self defence systems were inadequate.... even where on paper they shouldn't have let anything through, they did... time and time again. The Argentines had Sea Dart in service... one of the two good SAMs the British had, so it was down to Sea Wolf and because it wasn't on every ship and every ship with it wasn't present when Exocets were used.... or in the case of the Sheffield were switched off so a ship in the group could communicate with London via satellite communication whose transmission was interfered with by the Sea Wolfs systems...

    Attack is always much easier and more potent than defence... which is something you should always keep in mind...

    The slava could face 8 exocets at a time with 4 coming from the right and 4 from the left.

    Being a cruiser it is unlikely to be on its own, and even a frigate with Pantsir could deal with that...

    Western subsonic missiles like exocet and harpoon have send to the bottom tens of soviet made ships equiped with ak-630 that were supposed to be enough against such missiles.

    Absolutely, an AK-630 on its own is not up to the task for ship defence, which is why larger more capable systems have been developed... on larger ships the AK-630 has been replaced multiple times and its radar and directing systems upgraded to much better performance too.

    P-15 were jammed by israeli pretty easy back in the 70s.

    Yup, exported P-15s... yes they were.

    Soviet hurried up to make a copy of harpoon/exocet after the Malvinas war after seeing how good the exocet was.

    That is a lie... they already had anti ship and anti radar Kh-31s by then, and the Kh-35 is always described as a copy of Harpoon... never exocetski.

    By about 1975 the US Navy had two anti ship cruise missiles... Harpoon and Tomahawk... I believe at that stage the Soviets had about 7 anti ship missiles and counting.

    Aster was proven to be capable to intercept mach 3 low flying targets. Oniks is in fact mach 2 and not mach 3 as some here say. I don't say Oniks sucks I say P-1000/500/700 are outdated and having 16 of them is useless when they could have 64 uksk.

    Sea Wolf was proven to shoot down Exocet too... their kirovs will have 80 missile tubes it is not the end of the world if their upgraded Slavas keep their 16 Vulkans.

    Poliment/redut is a copy of Aster system deployed in 2001.

    Aster uses two stage missiles and is a totally different system, Redut is 9M96 missiles developed for the S-400 family to replace the shorter ranged S-300 systems being retired.


    French and chinese are taking all the market of russian MIC. All the traditional clients are buying more and more from them instead from Russia. In 20 years they will be left with african countries only.

    More to do with politics that any properties of the Russian products themselves, in 20 years time Rafale will be a billion dollars a plane and no body will be able to afford it.

    French can build frigates in decent time.

    The decent frigates the Russians build do take longer... but where is the hurry... it makes more sense to get them right before they start producing them in numbers.

    Russia needed help from France to make heli carrier.

    Russia wanted some proven and reliable ships urgently and assessed their options and chose the Mistral.

    The French cannot be trusted however and reneged on the deal so now Russia is selling components and helicopters to Egypt... which probably broke the ice to sell them MiG-29M2s and Su-35s as well.

    Now Russia is making her own helicopter carriers... laid down two and will probably end up making four.

    Egypt probably wont buy two more Mistrals, but the Russians likely would have... they always planned to get four so they could base two in the northern fleet and two in the pacific fleet.

    Russia begs france for the engine of its helicopters and also for the engines if its SSJ100.

    Russia is making its own engines to replace French ones previously used because France has become an unreliable supplier and cannot support their products because their leader is a coward. French engine company offered to change from getting a US company to make the titanium high precision hot parts in all their engines, to getting the Russians to make them for the engines Russia uses and for all the other engines they make so they are no longer relying on US suppliers who of course are subject to sanctions if France decides to do something the US disapproves of... which happens so often.
    Russia decided to just make its own engines instead, because French companies are made unreliable by their government.... and owning all the components in your weapons means no strings attached limiting who you can sell them to.

    What did France buy from Russia ? Raw materials.

    Plenty of customers for that around the world...

    Copy? How dare you insult the vastly superior and far more technologically advanced Russian missiles, the first "copy" of your pathetic exocet that comes to mind is the Moskit, a missile with far greater range and a significantly bigger warhead, it also uses ramjet propulsion instead of a primitive solid fuel rocket motor.

    He is trying to insinuate the Kh-35 is a copy of Exocet... but the dates are wrong.

    The Soviets did examine British experience in the Falklands... and to this day you will see HMGs like Kord fitted all over their ships to provide small arms fire protection from aircraft carrying dumb bombs.... the British found lots of tracer ammo going out could put off the pilots... even small calibre stuff that might not even damage them...

    On paper russian atgm are more than good yet we saw in a exopsition where they had time to prepare themselves that the missiles had a Pk of around 50%.

    Of course... plan future military operations with that in mind... Russian missiles miss... Twisted Evil

    Jamm it correctly and it misses your ship and falls in the water. It shot it down.

    Shot it down has a specific meaning... jamming it and making it miss is defeating the missile or evading it but it is not shooting it down.

    What missiles was intercepted by a siviet system ? Could they engage an exocet flying at 5m or spot it ? No.

    When has Exocet ever operated at such an altitude?

    BTW they practise with their own anti ship missiles... including weapons like Moskit and Kh-35... Phalanx has its own radar that has problems with low flying targets. The radars for AK-630 are superior and mounted higher up but still able to detect and track low flying targets effectively enough. The radar systems on Kashtan are cm and mm wave radar systems and optical systems originally based on the ones for Tunguska and later Pantsir... which were intended to hit low flying threats too.

    There is no need for weapons if russian missiles are easily jammed.

    You are right... they should make their frigates much cheaper... don't worry about SAMs... just have a jammer...


    Aster proved to be capable to deal with supersonic missiles. Just like S-300 could destroy exocet but I was pointing out that slava has just one engagement radar and can face an attack which involves multiple side attacks.

    Slava would not use S-300 to shoot down subsonic anti ship missiles. OSA and TOR systems are intended for that, as well as the gatling guns.

    Kh-35 which is used on Steregoushchy which is the first modern design after USSR fall. Total copy.

    Such a total copy of Exocet its nickname is Harpoonski...

    Russian antiship missiles are just proven against a barge.

    Of course they are... the Russians are known for their unrealistic tests... most of the time they just wing it...

    360° engagement. 2 sorts of missiles: medium and long range. Active radar seaker. Standardized 8 cells VLS.

    The 9M96 missiles were intended to replace the obsolete S-300 missiles.... the shorter ranged old ones, so 360 degrees was not new nor invented by the French... standard Soviet practise in the 1970s... the two sorts of missiles was already employed by the S-300V also operational in the 1970s, and the S-350 system uses three missiles... short range 9M100, and medium and long range 9M96 missiles.

    Aster wasn't even the first to use vertically launched naval missiles... that was the Kirov with the Rif and Klintok missiles....
    Cells were an American invention I believe...

    And Aster has the pifpaf mode which makes it the best missile system of its category.

    Does that mean it waves its finger at the enemy in a disapproving way and so they leave... embarrassed about what they were trying to do?

    kvs likes this post

    PapaDragon
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 9519
    Points : 9601
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    P-500 Bazalt / P-1000 Vulcan - Page 2 Empty Re: P-500 Bazalt / P-1000 Vulcan

    Post  PapaDragon on Sun Sep 13, 2020 2:10 pm

    The-thing-next-door wrote:...Proven does not mean good, only that it has been used a few times.

    Does the T-14 Armata need to go kill a few helpless separatists to be considered the best tank in the world?

    Yes it does

    It would be necessary first step


    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 26273
    Points : 26819
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    P-500 Bazalt / P-1000 Vulcan - Page 2 Empty Re: P-500 Bazalt / P-1000 Vulcan

    Post  GarryB on Sun Sep 13, 2020 5:04 pm

    It seems George has done a bit of trimming to this thread and looking at what he deleted you are not missing much.

    Can I just say calm down and stop with the abuse or there will be time outs and this thread will be locked... which is ridiculous.

    BTW The Kh-35 Harpoonski was designed for export... that was known at the time because it was designed in the 1980s and was only ever used on a ship that was for East Germany.

    According to Wiki (terrible source but the reference checks out) the missile didn't enter official Russian service till 2006 so if it was a copy of Exocet and they made it in a hurry because of how wonderful it was they seriously took their sweet time about it.

    They introduced Onyx in small numbers in 1996, so it is not like there was no work done in that area.

    I would think the Moskit... SS-N-22 Sunburn whose designation 3M80 suggests it was developed in 1980, and was deployed on Sovremmeny Class destroyers that at launch climbed to 300m in the air to scan for its target and then dropped down below 7m altitude to then flew 120km to hit said target at mach 2.2 would be a wee bit more scary, but you have to admit Exocet has sunk more actual ships... though that has more to do with opportunity than performance.

    What was most amusing was that I remember a British naval officer explaining that while they did lose a few ships to Exocet it was important to remember that Exocet was a sea skimming missile and the Soviets didn't have any of those so we should be fine... Hahahahahaha....
    George1
    George1

    Posts : 15033
    Points : 15536
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    P-500 Bazalt / P-1000 Vulcan - Page 2 Empty Re: P-500 Bazalt / P-1000 Vulcan

    Post  George1 on Sun Sep 13, 2020 5:13 pm

    i deleted irrelevent posts about france so that we can get back on topic

    GarryB likes this post

    Hole
    Hole

    Posts : 3257
    Points : 3257
    Join date : 2018-03-24
    Age : 44
    Location : Merkelland

    P-500 Bazalt / P-1000 Vulcan - Page 2 Empty Re: P-500 Bazalt / P-1000 Vulcan

    Post  Hole on Sun Sep 13, 2020 8:28 pm

    GarryB wrote:It seems George has done a bit of trimming to this thread and looking at what he deleted you are not missing much.

    Can I just say calm down and stop with the abuse or there will be time outs and this thread will be locked... which is ridiculous.

    BTW The Kh-35 Harpoonski was designed for export...  that was known at the time because it was designed in the 1980s and was only ever used on a ship that was for East Germany.

    According to Wiki (terrible source but the reference checks out) the missile didn't enter official Russian service till 2006 so if it was a copy of Exocet and they made it in a hurry because of how wonderful it was they seriously took their sweet time about it.

    They introduced Onyx in small numbers in 1996, so it is not like there was no work done in that area.

    I would think the Moskit... SS-N-22 Sunburn whose designation 3M80 suggests it was developed in 1980, and was deployed on Sovremmeny Class destroyers that at launch climbed to 300m in the air to scan for its target and then dropped down below 7m altitude to then flew 120km to hit said target at mach 2.2 would be a wee bit more scary, but you have to admit Exocet has sunk more actual ships... though that has more to do with opportunity than performance.

    What was most amusing was that I remember a British naval officer explaining that while they did lose a few ships to Exocet it was important to remember that Exocet was a sea skimming missile and the Soviets didn't have any of those so we should be fine... Hahahahahaha....

    The ship was build in the GDR but was intended for the russian navy. To help the shipbuilding industry in east germany, like the Parchim II class.
    The Uran was developed for the "home market" but the only thing "copied" from the Harpoon/Exocet was the idea of putting a small missile on small ships or as second tier weapon onto ASW ships.
    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 6413
    Points : 6405
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    P-500 Bazalt / P-1000 Vulcan - Page 2 Empty Re: P-500 Bazalt / P-1000 Vulcan

    Post  Isos on Sun Sep 13, 2020 9:26 pm

    though that has more to do with opportunity than performance.

    Opportunity ? Lol no.

    One of the exocet was jammed but instead of falling into water it just locked on another ship, which was a civilian used for transport, and destroyed it.

    That's just good performance even if UK knew its opperating frequency they could not jamm it effectively.

    I agree that at the time nato had little hopes against soviet missiles but I say since the start is that those same missiles have little chances against moder NATO defences. Oniks too but with UKSK you can pack more of them on a 135m Gorshkov than you can pack p-1000 on a 11kt cruiser. That's what makes this missile a good missile.

    The opposite is also true. The Sovs or Kara or Krivak ships had air defences that would struggle against NATO anti ship missiles.

    Udaloy with tor would have done better however but being a small range system they could be overwhelmed.

    I don't want to discuss that part but the place where the fight would happen meabs a lot. Russia would have cover with ground aviation and keep its navy near shores. Soviet had plenty of bases around the world and if their navy met with a Carrier group where they couldn't provide air cover they would be in bad situation. But then they would have subs and long range aviation... so it's an endless talk.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 26273
    Points : 26819
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    P-500 Bazalt / P-1000 Vulcan - Page 2 Empty Re: P-500 Bazalt / P-1000 Vulcan

    Post  GarryB on Mon Sep 14, 2020 7:07 am

    The ship was build in the GDR but was intended for the russian navy. To help the shipbuilding industry in east germany, like the Parchim II class.

    I remember its western designation of SS-N-25 Switchblade, but I don't remember ever seeing it on a Russian ship... (in the 1980s and 1990s)

    It is essentially the BAL shore defence missile that replaced the obsolete Termit P-15.... a much smaller and more compact missile with better range and much better electronics that could be carried on a truck the same size as the one that carried one P-16 missile that can carry about 8 Kh-35s.

    One of the exocet was jammed but instead of falling into water it just locked on another ship, which was a civilian used for transport, and destroyed it.

    Antiship missiles don't acquire targets till they get close, and losing a lock and getting a lock on something else that is not jamming is perfectly normal... but when all the ships there are military that means your missiles hit civilian ships not equipped with jammers.

    In this case it worked because the British were using these ships to support their operations... troop transports and carrying helicopters and other cargo...

    That's just good performance even if UK knew its opperating frequency they could not jamm it effectively.

    But you just admitted they did jam it... it hit ships that didn't have jammers.

    I agree that at the time nato had little hopes against soviet missiles but I say since the start is that those same missiles have little chances against moder NATO defences.

    That is not true, because new Russian ships are going to have these new very high speed missiles in enormous numbers instead of the tiny numbers on very big ships the old 7.5 ton missiles were carried on.

    For Russia the situation hasn't really changed much... Harpoon and Harpoon like missiles.... supposedly compensating for their lack of individual lethality with large numbers.
    If large numbers works for slow vulnerable subsonic missiles why are you so confident that enormously faster missiles flying at the edge of the atmosphere will be such easy beats?

    Oniks too but with UKSK you can pack more of them on a 135m Gorshkov than you can pack p-1000 on a 11kt cruiser. That's what makes this missile a good missile.

    I think you are missing the point... three Slava class cruisers kept in service as a stopgap keeping their old missiles but with upgrades in fuel and electronics and perhaps even ramjet motor... these things were in service in the 1980s so any new ones will be like granddads old hammer... two new heads and three new handles.... space age materials and bluetooth and wifi enabled...

    This is not their new plan... they are not going to scrub their designs for new destroyers and new cruisers and just go with three Slava class ships with 16 missiles.

    They are likely not going to bother with the angled UKSK launchers because why bother... there are no other ships they have they could do that to anyway so it would just be for these three ships... and 1,000km range Vulkan missiles will still sink a lot of targets when operating as a wolf pack flying together and cooperating in a swarm like they are supposed to do.

    These upgraded Slavas will likely get radar and sensor and communications upgrades and the vertical launchers for their Rif missiles will likely be upgraded to use the 250km and 400km range S-400 missiles that are the same size as the missiles they already use. I suspect the OSA will be replaced with Pantsir considering their location but it could be a new model TOR...

    They were the sort of ships those anti ship missiles were supposed to sink... and Krivak was a Frigate mostly used for border patrol... I am not even sure they were Russian Navy ships.

    Udaloy with tor would have done better however but being a small range system they could be overwhelmed.

    With only about 8 missiles on HATO ships short range wouldn't be a problem... TOR is fast and is designed to engage four targets at once with two missiles for each target as needed. Without trees or hills in the way a naval TOR would be the best system on the planet for shooting down low flying missiles in the 1980s and to be honest is still one of the best.

    I don't want to discuss that part but the place where the fight would happen meabs a lot. Russia would have cover with ground aviation and keep its navy near shores. Soviet had plenty of bases around the world and if their navy met with a Carrier group where they couldn't provide air cover they would be in bad situation. But then they would have subs and long range aviation... so it's an endless talk.

    For every situation or capability there is a exception where it wont work, or that capability is the best solution.

    Can you agree that the design and layout and choice of missiles for the upgraded Slava class ships was chosen for price and convenience... there is no point fitting angled UKSK launchers to perhaps the only type of ships that would ever use them. Angled UKSK launchers only make sense when there is no space under the deck and you are replacing rather large angled launchers... the Kiev class carriers are all gone now and all the other ships that had large external missile tubes.... the Udaloys are losing them, and it looks like they are not keeping their Sovs.

    Considering they will have two Kirovs with 80 UKSK tubes for Onyx and Zircon, keeping the Slavas is more about three large command ships that can manage the much better fire power of the smaller ships it is operating with... until a new large cruiser design is finalised and built... with experience using improved sensors and new radars and 400km range SAMs which the Russian and Soviet Navy have never deployed before.

    I think we have already wasted enough time on what is just a low level upgrade of an old ship they are only clearly going to be using for the minimum of time that makes angled launchers not worth it.

    Hell, the size of the Vulkans they could completely remodel them with new ramjet motors tiny compact motors, AESA radar and expendable extra fuel tanks so when it is launched it is big and heavy like the space shuttle, but as it flys it gets lighter and its power to weight ratio massively improves and it climbs and keeps climbing and you end up with something with a 3,000km range and enormous speed from near space... or they could just further improve the much smaller and much lighter Zircon that can be widely deployed in already fitted standard launchers across their ship and sub fleet.
    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 6413
    Points : 6405
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    P-500 Bazalt / P-1000 Vulcan - Page 2 Empty Re: P-500 Bazalt / P-1000 Vulcan

    Post  Isos on Mon Sep 14, 2020 9:58 am

    But you just admitted they did jam it... it hit ships that didn't have jammers.

    A missile with a tiny radar can't be jamm-proof against a shipborn Jammer that has enough power to burn its electronics.

    Instead of falling into water it re-aquired another target and destroyed it. Ut didn't just hit a civilian vessel but destroyed a ship in the formation. So yeah its a success.
    The-thing-next-door
    The-thing-next-door

    Posts : 854
    Points : 902
    Join date : 2017-09-18
    Location : Uranus

    P-500 Bazalt / P-1000 Vulcan - Page 2 Empty Re: P-500 Bazalt / P-1000 Vulcan

    Post  The-thing-next-door on Mon Sep 14, 2020 1:54 pm

    George1 wrote:i deleted irrelevent posts about france so that we can get back on topic

    You missed ISOS's original post and every other post on this page.

    Someone should create a new section on this forum for all the masochistic eurotards to have the inadequacy of thier little satellite states pointed out so that thier comedically retarded posts do not blot out the serious discussions.

    Garry could you please return this discussion to the modernised P-1000? There are already discussions about the Armata, french shit, Redut, KH-35, Tor and Oniks.



    Anyway regarding the performance of the modernised P-1000, would it be possible to use the P-1000's radar to allow for the missile to detect and react to incoming threats? If it could the P-1000 could evade incoming missiles at any point in its journey and not just the terminal phase thus achieving a far greater level of survivability.

    I also wonder if with newer computers and aerodynamic situations they could have improved its evasive maneuvering to be able to reliably evade the more agile western SAMs.

    Obviously a liquid fuelled missile would have significantly superior evasive characteristics when compared to a solid rocket powered missile and obviously since the development of decent radars and proximity fuses the slightly larger size and RCS is rather insignificant in the terminal phase.
    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 6413
    Points : 6405
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    P-500 Bazalt / P-1000 Vulcan - Page 2 Empty Re: P-500 Bazalt / P-1000 Vulcan

    Post  Isos on Mon Sep 14, 2020 2:08 pm


    I also wonder if with newer computers and aerodynamic situations they could have improved its evasive maneuvering to be able to reliably evade the more agile western SAMs.

    Why ? You posted a long post saying western AD sucks and russian missiles are perfect.
    The-thing-next-door
    The-thing-next-door

    Posts : 854
    Points : 902
    Join date : 2017-09-18
    Location : Uranus

    P-500 Bazalt / P-1000 Vulcan - Page 2 Empty Re: P-500 Bazalt / P-1000 Vulcan

    Post  The-thing-next-door on Mon Sep 14, 2020 3:00 pm

    Isos wrote:

    I also wonder if with newer computers and aerodynamic situations they could have improved its evasive maneuvering to be able to reliably evade the more agile western SAMs.

    Why ? You posted a long post saying western AD sucks and russian missiles are perfect.

    I posted an explanation of why I am skeptical of western "wunderwaffe" AD systems, in short they have a track record of consistent failure as opposed to the more successful (but not perfect) Russian counterparts.

    British and US naval AD failed to intercept export variants of P-15 termits and exocets while the Buk M2E and Pantsir, both export systems, have destroyed numerous US and eurostani missiles in syria with relatively favorable results.

    We know little of Russian ABM performance or the performance of Russian AD systems against supersonic missiles, but we do however know of the ineffectiveness of western AD systems against such missiles. From this we can conclude that Russian missiles are effective against domestic service western subsonic missiles, however thier performance against supersonics and ballistics is unknown and that western AD missiles are ineffective across the board.

    This is not however to say that western anti missile capabilities are non existent, but rather that they have little if any successful experience in this field and a poor track record.

    Russia has had a very successful history with SAMs and as such has both a substantial and experienced missile industry and while I doubt they would have an easy time defeating thier own offensive missiles the west's are comparatively primitive.

    Military analysis is about, or atleast supposed to be about the actual performance of weapons and forces and not patriotically biased text based masturbation, if you want an echo chamber of western propaganda there are plenty of other forums out there that will gladly oblige, if not you must be open to criticism of your nation's MIC and control your emotions.

    I will admit to taking part in mocking the west for its failures to develop technologies Russia has mastered, but I atleast manage do so
    most of the time without lying or making unrealistic claims.

    Sponsored content

    P-500 Bazalt / P-1000 Vulcan - Page 2 Empty Re: P-500 Bazalt / P-1000 Vulcan

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Wed Oct 28, 2020 7:28 am