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...
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?