Project 20836 Derzkiy-class modular Corvette

Isos wrote:There is no point having the 20836 which is expensive for its class, carry just one container more than other ships (for calling it multirole) and is poorly armed.

The 20836 is first and foremost a technology demonstrator and testbed for emerging new construction technologies.  It is as radically different from previous corvettes like the 20830 Steregushy as the 20830 was from the 1135 Burevestnik/Krivak.

What, do people really not understand this????   Seriously????  

FFS its just a single hull being developed as a first-of-class for a post-20830/20835 corvettes.  Just sit and watch and see where it goes from here.  The Russian navy isn't going to make-or-break on one 3,400T hull....

Sure, but if you look at the specifications that are available, it is supposed to use similar propulsion to the Admiral Gorshkov in number of and type of turbines. It is getting close to the displacement of the Admiral Gorshkov. Yet it has like a third of the VLS cells. Once Admiral Gorshkov gets updated i.e. Admiral Chichagov this 20386 will look even more anemic. And I also doubt it will have the same seamanship capabilities. I mean just look at it. Wtf is it with a "corvette" with 3400 tons displacement? Ridiculous.

Well part of the problem is that the navy has changed.

Corvettes used to be single design ships for one mission only... often that mission was anti ship/anti carrier with large heavy anti ship missiles like the OSA with a medium gun that was normally used during peace time as a patrol boat... the enormous powerful missiles silly and redundant most of the time.

Skip forward to now and their new corvette designs can still have anti ship missiles, but even Uran armed ones can use their missiles against land based targets, and most are fully multirole with UKSK systems enabling a range of weapon loads... not to mention massively upgraded sensors and communications equipment... they are fitted with Sigma, which is the Russian equivalent of AEGIS.

More importantly the Russian Navy really did not use a lot of Frigates... most of there Frigates were used by the MVD and KGB as coastal patrol and light duties, the Soviet Navy tended to use destroyers for near and far operations... they didn't travel enormous distances a lot with them either.

It seems the sophisticated nature of their new Corvettes and Frigates means these two types alone could probably handle most local defensive operations around Russia, but the new helicopter landing ships and the Ivan Gren type landing ships that will be replacing older models will need support ships like destroyers and cruisers, and of course aircraft carriers for operations great distances from Russian waters.

They need different corvette types because corvettes are the smallest ships so it is harder to make them fully multirole.

No ship would normally act on its own and ships the size of corvettes and frigates are designed to defend themselves but are not big enough to protect other ships.

An anti sub mission one corvette would be useless, but combine 3-4 corvettes and add a few frigates and you end up with a capable well armed force with quite a few helicopters and drones capable of hunting down enemy subs.

Having different types of corvette makes sense, but a frigate sized ship should be big enough to have sonar and radar and a variety of weapons to protect itself.

A destroyer is even bigger and can be even better armed to not just protect itself but also other ships, while the whole purpose of a Cruiser is size and weapon capacity and sensor size to protect a group of ships, while a fixed wing aircraft carrier is there to provide eyes and ears and a 360 degree view of the sea and air around those ships so nothing can sneak up and surprise them.

Carriers don't make groups of ships invincible... but they make them much more costly to attack and will defeat attacking forces that would have beaten the same group of ships without that carrier and its air component.

The presence of a carrier in the Falklands war made the British Force viable, though it was a close run thing because pocket carriers with useless VSTOL fighters were marginal in the role at best. If they had had a better carrier with Phantom fighters with Sky Flash BVR missiles and Buccaneer strike aircraft and of course AWACS aircraft they probably would not have lost ships and would not have needed the risky Vulcan missions.

Russia has five fleets and extreme climatic conditions... having one or two extra different corvettes is a good idea just to see what works best and that means if they work as planned they can buy the correct number of ships and place them where they are most useful.

Very much agree... the measure of a ship is not how many missile tubes it carries... impressive as that might be.

miketheterrible wrote:https://en.topwar.ru/181672-tehnicheskij-spusk-korvet-proekta-20386-ubrali-iz-jellinga-chtoby-ne-meshal.html

Some strange writing to be honest.  They make it sound like they can build the gearbox and engines one or the other.  Not saying anything that they can or cannot increase production.

But I think some on authorities are not interested in this ship

This article is shit.  Thats not an off-the-cuff comment.  Its a considered viewpoint and one that I've settled upon after much thought and due consideration. I could be more verbose in my pronouncements (like in this paragraph..) but I feel that succintness is the best approach in this case.

Hilarious that the author choses to quote other gibberish to apparently suggest that the concept of distributed lethality is somehow a failure. Consider the following:

The main thing that does not suit us is the too high price and excessive armament - the Kalibr cruise missiles, which work against sea and ground targets. Project 20385 does not meet the requirements fleet", - said the interlocutor of the publication. According to him, the estimated cost of one ship is about 14 billion rubles, but in reality it can reach 18 billion. For a corvette with a displacement of 2,2 thousand tons, although made using stealth technology, this is a lot. The equally modern frigates of Project 11356, which are now being built for the Black Sea Fleet, have a displacement of almost twice as much - 4 thousand tons, and cost the same.

The frigates of this project are ships of the open sea, with a significant range, and the corvettes 20385 are intended for the near sea zone. Sailors believe that such a powerful weaponlike "Caliber" to these small ships unnecessarily.

Really? The 11356 is equally modern as the 20385, despite that fact that the 11356 isn't much more than a tarted up Talwar-class with a UKSK system?

If "sailors" think the 20386 doesn't "need" a UKSK system, what does that say about the 21631 Buyan-M?  I guess because the guy who peels the potatoes or changes the bedclothes doesn't see why corvettees should be able to sink an enemy destroyer with a supersonic AShM, we should just remove the offending ordance and fit something more "suitable" like a few 75mm guns and a few RBU launchers???  

The rest of this shoddy article is just the author puking what seems to be his personal disapproval of the concept of modularised systems, and his pissing and moaning about what he sees as unacceptale compromises.

He yabbers that the 20386 artillery system will be "less effective than that of the old 20380" yet they both have a single A-190 gun.  

He complains that the hanger location will require a lift which is "an expensive and technically complex solution" - really? He think a hydraulic lift is complex??

He complains that specialist containers can't have overboard access to the sea without moving the FRC - yeah, so fucking what???  

He complains that if a large 40" container is carried, the helo will be displaced from the hangar. Yeah, again so what?  Thats the whole fucking idea about modularity.  The ships configuration can be adjusted to match the fucking needs of the mission.  If the helo needs to sit on the back of the deck under a tarpauin and only be used when necessary (ie if other ships in the taskforce can't meet a specific operational need) so what?  Its a 3,400T hull, not a cruiser.  There isn't room for everything at once. The idea is to be able to reconfigure to maximise specific capabilities, and that requires a downgrade in others deemed less important to the mission.  

Check out this utter bullshit...  /facepalm x 100

A special problem is the placement of the antenna sheets of the radar complex on the sides of the superstructure, which is made of composite materials.

Many experts believe that due to the inevitable deformations of the superstructure when moving in waves, the canvases will “play”, randomly changing their position, which will make accurate shooting impossible.

Wut?  This idiot thinks a flat panel array is supported by the outer skin rather than the inner structure? Does he really think the panels will move due to weather effects or vessel motions?  Does he really think that Russian naval architechs are so unutterably stupid that they don't know how to mount ships systems to a vessel that uses composities in its construction???    Experts?  What "experts" are saying this crappola??  

Then we have this little pearl of Sun Tzu-level wisdom:

But even if everything works, nothing will work anyway.

Yeah, I know I'm reading a translation, but even the dumbest literal machine couldn't disguise the empty-headed know-nuffin qualities on display here as he proceeds to lamblast the vessel radar system on no other facts than their location on the superstructure and unsubstaniated "wisdom" from the US and ChiComs.  Gods above, i need to marshall my strength to keep reading this nonsensical shit-slurry...

I lost my will to continue as I fought my bodies basic need to expel stomach contents as I read his amateurish and arbitary "critique" on the 20386 powertrain configuration.

Nah, this scribbler-for-hire just doesn't get it, and he is clearly working with an agenda.  The question is who is putting bread is his begging bowl and calling his tune?

He's not a Ukrainian by any chance?  

What do you mean by dumped?

Ships don't remain in the places they are made forever... eventually they have to go out and start being used.

Being a modular corvette I would expect it will take longer to get right, but if they do manage to get it right it might be rather more useful than the other corvettes they have already made.

I think I already mentioned that the biggest problem with Corvettes is their small size means that some things are often left off and it is hard to make them fully multirole and multifunctional.

That is not the end of the world because I think I also mentioned that no ship would do very much on its own so a group of ships and perhaps even subs or aircraft can achieve all sorts of things.

A modular system holds the promise of being even better as long as it has the modules it needs each time for each job.

Of course with most ships having drones and helicopters then being able to carry some cargo containers with something they don't normally carry might be very useful... even if it means that ship wont be carrying its own helicopter in this case.

What the Chinese don't do is develop a whole new class of ship with completely new components and different tooling just to satisfy a niche requirement.

They Chinese also are not Russia... most of their weapons and systems seem derivative and perhaps they are afraid of making unique designs in case they fail.

I guess the closest to their corvettes in Russian terms would be the Karakurt class corvette, except the Type 056 has better seamanship capabilities.

The Karakurts are evolutions of Buyan river boats, but Corvettes are coastal defense littoral zone vessels that are not intended to sail around the world, they are not supposed to operate in the middle of the Atlantic during a storm... clearly making ships the Chinese way doesn't make sense if they are going to be used in different places and in different environments.

Different requirements, they don't need to travel the Russian canal system.

Which is probably an excellent reason why Russia should just keep doing what it is doing rather than copy China?

Considering the huge limitations in construction capability of the Russian naval industry I would think they would be better served by at least making those ships as multifunctional as possible.

Russian Corvettes and Frigates are better armed and more multifunctional than the best ships in the Royal Navy or the French Navy... if they wanted production like China they could make simple basic ships like they did 30 years ago.

Instead they are making vastly more capable and multifunction and modular vessels with modern weapons and sensors... the production rate is not fast because there is something called design and testing where you make some stuff and then test to make sure it does what you want before putting it into mass production.

If you don't you end up with fighter planes like F-35... in full production but not working properly yet and expensive... even more expensive if they eventually fix its problems.

Frankly I think the Gremyashchiy is good enough.

It is likely they will want to make their own decisions in that regard.

There simply isn't funding or an interest to make enormous numbers of ships rapidly like China is currently doing, Russia is not China.

They have plans in place for production and development and they are following that plan... as upsetting as that might be to internet fanboys who want ships now.

Sounds perfectly reasonable... they made three Zumwalt class ships of a planned 32 before they decided they would be test ships, and with the LCS they made about 16 or 17 before they realised their gearbox didn't work and they couldn't go faster than 16 knots, so that is 19-20 new test boats for the US Navy... they will likely spend billions more to make the 16 billion Ford class Helicopter barge to make it more than just a test vessel...

In comparison they can test all sorts of new technologies on this ship...