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


    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    avatar
    marat

    Posts : 307
    Points : 303
    Join date : 2015-04-26

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 27 Empty Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  marat on Wed Aug 19, 2020 2:28 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    most likely AK 192 single 130mm gun same as in Gorshkov. But we will see.

    Why put the gun of a frigate on a cruiser?


    Because that is biggest and the most modern gun they have. They do not have new 152 or 203 naval guns designs, or at least not in mature stage.
    Big_Gazza
    Big_Gazza

    Posts : 2082
    Points : 2084
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 27 Empty Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  Big_Gazza on Wed Aug 19, 2020 3:23 pm

    marat wrote:
    GarryB wrote:
    most likely AK 192 single 130mm gun same as in Gorshkov. But we will see.

    Why put the gun of a frigate on a cruiser?


    Because that is biggest and the most modern gun they have. They do not have new 152 or 203 naval guns designs, or at least not in mature stage.

    Don't they? How do you know?  AFAIK we didn't see the A-192M publicly until one was bolted onto the Adm Gorshkov.  I won't be surprised at all to see them fit out with a navalised version of the 2S35.
    magnumcromagnon
    magnumcromagnon

    Posts : 6111
    Points : 6262
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 27 Empty Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Wed Aug 19, 2020 8:29 pm

    marat wrote:
    GarryB wrote:
    most likely AK 192 single 130mm gun same as in Gorshkov. But we will see.

    Why put the gun of a frigate on a cruiser?


    Because that is biggest and the most modern gun they have. They do not have new 152 or 203 naval guns designs, or at least not in mature stage.

    Koalitsya is a unmanned module, they could just do what they did with the Tor module on the helicopter deck of a frigate some time back. Just add a containerized command post to control it, throw a thick rubber mat (like a meter thick) on top of helicopter pad to prevent damage to the deck, with a weight bearing recoil compensating gun stabilizer platform holding up the Koalitsiya module underneath. They could also probably containerize the ammo storage feed/loading mechanism, but the Koalitsiya module is already capable of storing '70' 152.4 mm shells, so there's less of need for that unless deployed  for missions of heavy artillery use. No need for deck penetration or a lengthy design planning process and boat modernization development process. The design, testing, and fielding in to service could be done within a 1.5 year time frame.
    SeigSoloyvov
    SeigSoloyvov

    Posts : 2030
    Points : 2022
    Join date : 2016-04-08

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 27 Empty Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  SeigSoloyvov on Wed Aug 19, 2020 9:49 pm

    Big_Gazza wrote:
    marat wrote:
    GarryB wrote:
    most likely AK 192 single 130mm gun same as in Gorshkov. But we will see.

    Why put the gun of a frigate on a cruiser?


    Because that is biggest and the most modern gun they have. They do not have new 152 or 203 naval guns designs, or at least not in mature stage.

    Don't they? How do you know?  AFAIK we didn't see the A-192M publicly until one was bolted onto the Adm Gorshkov.  I won't be surprised at all to see them fit out with a navalised version of the 2S35.

    Why would they do that.....Naval guns these days don't need to be bigger than 150m. that gun isn't even really meant to engage large surface combatants

    The days of big barrel guns on ships is long and past.
    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 6183
    Points : 6175
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 27 Empty Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  Isos on Wed Aug 19, 2020 10:00 pm

    SeigSoloyvov wrote:

    Why would they do that.....Naval guns these days don't need to be bigger than 150m. that gun isn't even really meant to engage large surface combatants

    The days of big barrel guns on ships is long and past.

    Firing at ground targets is still relevent. For exemple during landings or to destroy a port.

    Also the bigger the gun is the bigger a propelled round (with a ramjet engine) would be and the longer ranges it will go would be.
    SeigSoloyvov
    SeigSoloyvov

    Posts : 2030
    Points : 2022
    Join date : 2016-04-08

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 27 Empty Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  SeigSoloyvov on Thu Aug 20, 2020 12:44 am

    Isos wrote:
    SeigSoloyvov wrote:

    Why would they do that.....Naval guns these days don't need to be bigger than 150m. that gun isn't even really meant to engage large surface combatants

    The days of big barrel guns on ships is long and past.

    Firing at ground targets is still relevent. For exemple during landings or to destroy a port.

    Also the bigger the gun is the bigger a propelled round (with a ramjet engine) would be and the longer ranges it will go would be.

    Not for ship-mounted guns, missiles can do that far better with much greater accuracy this isn't WW2.

    Any range you could get with a "bigger" gun is worthless since missiles will always be longer range.

    Are you realllllllly trying to go down this route?.
    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 6183
    Points : 6175
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 27 Empty Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  Isos on Thu Aug 20, 2020 1:26 am

    Not for ship-mounted guns, missiles can do that far better with much greater accuracy this isn't WW2.

    Any range you could get with a "bigger" gun is worthless since missiles will always be longer range.

    Are you realllllllly trying to go down this route?.

    Missiles are expensive and their number is much more limited because the number of UKSK is still limited.

    Their warheads are also not so powerfull. 2 rounds of 152mm should do the same dammages.

    I'm not talking about firing on Washington but on targets like in Georgia, Ukraine, baltic states or Kurils if Japan invades where the ships can come much closer to the shores because of lack of defences. It would be artillery support and tactical strikes on shore targets. Each gun will have some 100-200 rounds, far greater than 16 kalibr, and they also go faster enabling real time fire support against mobile troops.

    Sovromenys 4x130mm gun were specifically made for that btw.

    GarryB likes this post

    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 25925
    Points : 26471
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 27 Empty Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  GarryB on Thu Aug 20, 2020 5:44 am

    Because that is biggest and the most modern gun they have. They do not have new 152 or 203 naval guns designs, or at least not in mature stage.

    They have stated that the 152mm gun of the land based Coalition is intended for naval use... the gun and ammo was a joint venture paid for by the Army and the Navy to create a gun that both can use... it would make sense to mount it on an upgraded cruiser... what else are they going to mount it on?

    Why would they do that.....Naval guns these days don't need to be bigger than 150m. that gun isn't even really meant to engage large surface combatants

    The days of big barrel guns on ships is long and past.

    They have just laid down two landing ships... hint hint hint...

    152mm guns are not excessively big, and their size offers rather a lot of potential in terms of guided rounds and long range munitions that are not an option for smaller calibres...

    What I mean to say is that you can have guided 57mm shells, but the payload they deliver on target is nothing like the 40kg weight a 152mm gun or indeed 120kg payload a 203mm gun could deliver...

    Not for ship-mounted guns, missiles can do that far better with much greater accuracy this isn't WW2.

    For a missile to deliver a 50kg warhead you are looking at a Kh-25 which have ranges of less than 40km in most versions and weigh about 300kgs each.... in comparison a 152mm shell can currently reach 70km with decent accuracy and they are talking about 170km range rounds...

    BTW the US planned to have a super gun mount on their Zumwalts till it turned out that each shell cost 800K which made them more expensive than missiles...

    The Russian round is unified with what the Russian Army are doing which spreads the cost...

    I'm not talking about firing on Washington but on targets like in Georgia, Ukraine, baltic states or Kurils if Japan invades where the ships can come much closer to the shores because of lack of defences. It would be artillery support and tactical strikes on shore targets. Each gun will have some 100-200 rounds, far greater than 16 kalibr, and they also go faster enabling real time fire support against mobile troops.

    Sovromenys 4x130mm gun were specifically made for that btw.

    The hint is probably the two helicopter landing ships they have just laid down too...

    203mm guns is purely my speculation and wishful thinking but they have publicly stated they plan to use the 152mm Coalition gun in the Navy.... which at the very least means replacing the 130mm Bereg coastal gun used together with the Bal (Kh-35) missile system, but also likely the weapon used on their planned cruisers... which would mean fitting them to their upgraded Kirov class cruisers would make a lot of sense in place of the existing 130mm twin gun mount.

    The naval gun would be different from Coalition but use the same barrels but different ammo hoists and handling systems. 10-20 rounds per minute is fast for land based artillery but you would want 4-5 times faster rates for a naval gun...

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 27 Naval_10
    avatar
    marat

    Posts : 307
    Points : 303
    Join date : 2015-04-26

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 27 Empty Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  marat on Thu Aug 20, 2020 10:06 am

    Big_Gazza wrote:
    Don't they? How do you know?  AFAIK we didn't see the A-192M publicly until one was bolted onto the Adm Gorshkov.  I won't be surprised at all to see them fit out with a navalised version of the 2S35.

    You cannot prove that something do not exists. But you could prove that it exist. So please do so, give any evidence that they have 152mm or 203mm new generation naval gun in advance test phase.


    Did you ever see that new gun in tests? Do you have any link that live tests of prototipe is performed?

    So, as for now I do not have any fact to assume they have such gun, I will rather assume that they do not have it then vice versa.

    Remember for how long we have info about new 57mm gun for IFV and Navy? It is produced long time ago, and we see it years ago but yet we do not have any in serial production or operational usage.

    A192M is not actually new as, afaik, under the surface that is same old AK130, they made new turret for stealth ships. But maybe that will be the case now that they just give reshaped turret for old ak130 but from my point of view having in mind that Kirov is not stealth that is nonsense.

    Regarding Koalitsia, that project was abandoned or I am not wrong?
    SeigSoloyvov
    SeigSoloyvov

    Posts : 2030
    Points : 2022
    Join date : 2016-04-08

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 27 Empty Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  SeigSoloyvov on Thu Aug 20, 2020 10:28 am

    Isos wrote:
    Not for ship-mounted guns, missiles can do that far better with much greater accuracy this isn't WW2.

    Any range you could get with a "bigger" gun is worthless since missiles will always be longer range.

    Are you realllllllly trying to go down this route?.

    Missiles are expensive and their number is much more limited because the number of UKSK is still limited.

    Their warheads are also not so powerfull. 2 rounds of 152mm should do the same dammages.

    I'm not talking about firing on Washington but on targets like in Georgia, Ukraine, baltic states or Kurils if Japan invades where the ships can come much closer to the shores because of lack of defences. It would be artillery support and tactical strikes on shore targets. Each gun will have some 100-200 rounds, far greater than 16 kalibr, and they also go faster enabling real time fire support against mobile troops.  

    Sovromenys 4x130mm gun were specifically made for that btw.

    and naval guns will never get the desired result these days, so you're just wasting many trying to naval bombardment.

    The guns would require enemy forces to be fairly close to the coastline after that they are useless.

    Please don't bring up old rust buckets made over 30 years ago that the Russians themselves don't even care for, the guns on those were found to be inadequate for the intended purpose.

    Sure there are situations where a gun is needed but they are very minor and mostly self-defense reasons.



    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 6183
    Points : 6175
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 27 Empty Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  Isos on Thu Aug 20, 2020 11:32 am

    French used their destroyer's guns to hit coastal targets in Libya. A modern gun will have rocket/ramjet powered guided rounds with 150-200km range.

    There are plenty of juicy targets on the shores : internet connexion centers, fuel depot, enemy ships, weapon storage, radars, civilian infrastructures in the ports...

    Sovs are old now but their guns were ver good back in the time. They would have bombed the shit out of Sweeds of Japanese durung landings.

    Moreover, like isreali/egyptian war showed, naval guns are still usefull for naval wars. If the missiles miss you are left only with that.
    SeigSoloyvov
    SeigSoloyvov

    Posts : 2030
    Points : 2022
    Join date : 2016-04-08

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 27 Empty Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  SeigSoloyvov on Thu Aug 20, 2020 11:39 am

    Isos wrote:French used their destroyer's guns to hit coastal targets in Libya. A modern gun will have rocket/ramjet powered guided rounds with 150-200km range.

    There are plenty of juicy targets on the shores : internet connexion centers, fuel depot, enemy ships, weapon storage, radars, civilian infrastructures in the ports...

    Sovs are old now but their guns were ver good back in the time. They would have bombed the shit out of Sweeds of Japanese durung landings.

    Moreover, like isreali/egyptian war showed, naval guns are still usefull for naval wars. If the missiles miss you are left only with that.

    and they did no strategic damage what so ever.

    Not really, you will not find that many targets close to a shoreline just the most basic requirements. You need to fight in a war to get a better understanding, You're just giving me online talking abouts.

    if the ships weren't sunk they could have done that but it would have made no difference overall.

    if you screw up very bad sure but that's a purely last last last resort.

    Big_Gazza
    Big_Gazza

    Posts : 2082
    Points : 2084
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 27 Empty Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  Big_Gazza on Thu Aug 20, 2020 12:04 pm

    SeigSoloyvov wrote:
    The guns would require enemy forces to be fairly close to the coastline after that they are useless.


    Given that shore bombardment in support of amphibious forces is generally all about softening up the defenders and weakening their ability to resist, i'd say that's not exactly problem! Laughing Laughing Laughing

    You are aware that major infrastructure like ports and bridges and naval depots are near the coastline? Laughing Laughing Laughing

    Other uses are for interdiction of shipping in blockade or anti-piracy operations. You can send a clear signal with arty without wasting a multi-million dollar missile. Nothing will stop a merchant ship faster than a 100mm HE exploding in the water a few hundreds meters from their bow, or a shell sailing 10m over the bridge deck. Laughing Laughing Laughing

    flamming_python and Hole like this post

    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 25925
    Points : 26471
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 27 Empty Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  GarryB on Fri Aug 21, 2020 12:33 pm

    You cannot prove that something do not exists. But you could prove that it exist. So please do so, give any evidence that they have 152mm or 203mm new generation naval gun in advance test phase.

    They said that they will be using 152mm calibre weapons in the Russian Navy...

    All the necessary photos of it are included in the thread showing the test videos and photos of the Zircon hypersonic missile they also have in testing...

    Some of them are blurred because they are secret of course. Twisted Evil

    Did you ever see that new gun in tests? Do you have any link that live tests of prototipe is performed?

    Why do you think they would tell us?

    BTW the drawing above was not done by me...

    So, as for now I do not have any fact to assume they have such gun, I will rather assume that they do not have it then vice versa.

    They reintroduced the Sverdlov class cruisers because they had 152mm guns and they wanted them to support their Ivan Rogov landing ships... what have they just laid down... do you think there are any Sverdlov cruisers left to drag out of mothballs?

    They stated that they were going to introduce a navalised 152mm Coalition gun for the Navy... I would think it would make sense to replace the Bereg coastal gun, so they can justify making quite a few of them and in terms of design they could just be the land based Coalition version on the wheeled truck mount for minimal costs to buy and operate, but for at sea use it would make sense to fit them to heavy destroyers and cruisers too... the same way the 130mm guns were fitted to Sovremmeny class destroyers and Kirov class cruisers after the first one which had two 100mm gun mounts the later ones had a single twin 130mm gun mount as fitted to the Sovs... which had two.

    Remember for how long we have info about new 57mm gun for IFV and Navy? It is produced long time ago, and we see it years ago but yet we do not have any in serial production or operational usage.

    The Army model is more urgent because enemy IFVs can't be penetrated at combat ranges with 30mm cannon any more so the 57mm round is necessary, but they are also making an air defence gun version for shooting down drones and munitions and aircraft, which is also going to enter service too.

    One company actually has a unified turret for land vehicles and naval use...

    http://roe.ru/eng/catalog/naval-systems/shipborne-weapons/au-220-m/

    A192M is not actually new as, afaik, under the surface that is same old AK130, they made new turret for stealth ships. But maybe that will be the case now that they just give reshaped turret for old ak130 but from my point of view having in mind that Kirov is not stealth that is nonsense.

    The old AK130 was 98 tons without ammo.... the new A192M is 30 tons without ammo.... yeah... they just reshaped the turret to make it look stealthy and that is why development of new Russian ships takes so long... take 68 tons off the turret shell of a gun mount is very tricky... Rolling Eyes

    Regarding Koalitsia, that project was abandoned or I am not wrong?

    Then what are they driving through Moscow in parades with Armata chassis and 152mm guns.... let alone the truck mounted versions...

    and naval guns will never get the desired result these days, so you're just wasting many trying to naval bombardment.

    With the improvements in communications and technology down to the individual soldier I would think having guided artillery shells soldiers taking a beach can direct with metre level precision might make a bit of a difference during a landing... especially ship gun fire which is not cancelled at night or in bad weather, or because enemy air defences are too strong...

    The guns would require enemy forces to be fairly close to the coastline after that they are useless.

    Even just standard existing shells with 70km range they could sit 50km offshore and hit targets 20km inland... later improvements to 170km improve performance even further... but the soldiers will be taking weapons and vehicles with them... it wont be their only support...

    Please don't bring up old rust buckets made over 30 years ago that the Russians themselves don't even care for, the guns on those were found to be inadequate for the intended purpose.

    The 130mm guns of the Sovs would struggle to be useful... with an effective range of only about 26km they seriously lack range, but the whole point of cooperating with the Army to develop much longer ranged guided shells happened for a reason...

    Sure there are situations where a gun is needed but they are very minor and mostly self-defense reasons.

    Greatly increase the range and make them accurate and they suddenly become very very useful.

    The Zumwalt shows a gun that is cheap, long ranged, and accurate is a disireable thing... they just stuffed up the implementation that is all.

    and they did no strategic damage what so ever.

    Why would you expect strategic damage?

    Not really, you will not find that many targets close to a shoreline just the most basic requirements. You need to fight in a war to get a better understanding, You're just giving me online talking abouts.

    What tends to happen when you start landing your own troops on a beach in enemy territory is that the enemy often then sends its own troops to oppose that landing... the enemy targets come to you... even if you don't destroy the entire enemy force with shells it is not important... quite often even if the shells make the enemy keep their heads down while the beachhead is established and expanded then often that is all you need... the landed troops can then do the rest.

    Other uses are for interdiction of shipping in blockade or anti-piracy operations. You can send a clear signal with arty without wasting a multi-million dollar missile. Nothing will stop a merchant ship faster than a 100mm HE exploding in the water a few hundreds meters from their bow, or a shell sailing 10m over the bridge deck.

    More importantly you can get creative... a smoke shell landing on the main deck of a ship can form a serious distraction... and as you say... you can fire warning shots that don't cost millions of dollars each.

    Thanks to a JV with Bulgaria they also have jammer rounds in 152mm calibre that are used to jam communications within a few hundred metres of where the shell lands... punch a few into the side of a ship and they wont be crying for help... a non phosphorus smoke round entering the bridge will clear it pretty fast too...
    SeigSoloyvov
    SeigSoloyvov

    Posts : 2030
    Points : 2022
    Join date : 2016-04-08

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 27 Empty Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  SeigSoloyvov on Sat Aug 22, 2020 3:48 am

    Big_Gazza wrote:
    SeigSoloyvov wrote:
    The guns would require enemy forces to be fairly close to the coastline after that they are useless.


    Given that shore bombardment in support of amphibious forces is generally all about softening up the defenders and weakening their ability to resist, i'd say that's not exactly problem!  Laughing Laughing Laughing

    You are aware that major infrastructure like ports and bridges and naval depots are near the coastline?  Laughing Laughing Laughing

    Other uses are for interdiction of shipping in blockade or anti-piracy operations. You can send a clear signal with arty without wasting a multi-million dollar missile.  Nothing will stop a merchant ship faster than a 100mm HE exploding in the water a few hundreds meters from their bow, or a shell sailing 10m over the bridge deck.   Laughing Laughing Laughing

    1. You will not be destroying the port, you will capture the ports to use them. Only a moron would cause heavy damage to the ports. The only time destroying a naval point is acceptable is if you are retreating from it or if the enemy is dug in and refuses to leave but if you try and use those guns for that, then you don't know what your doing at all. So bringing up "let's bombard the ports" shows a clear lack of understanding of procedure on your end. Keep reading them internet articles.

    2. Bridges? that greatly depends on what country you are talking about and most small bridges can easily be bypassed lol. I find it funny when people try and bring up oddly specific points that really may or may not have any meaning depending on geographic location to argue. Unless it is a massive bridge it won't matter, this isn't WW2 lol.

    3. Congrats, you will notice I said they aren't totally useless and do have some uses.
    avatar
    marat

    Posts : 307
    Points : 303
    Join date : 2015-04-26

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 27 Empty Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  marat on Sat Aug 22, 2020 11:28 am



    They said that they will be using 152mm calibre weapons in the Russian Navy...

    They said many things 20 years ago they said they will have 20 Stereguschy class but still they do not have them.



    All the necessary photos of it are included in the thread showing the test videos and photos of the Zircon hypersonic missile they also have in testing...

    Some of them are blurred because they are secret of course.   Twisted Evil

    Did you ever see that new gun in tests? Do you have any link that live tests of prototipe is performed?

    Why do you think they would tell us?

    Testing of Zirkon is not secret I do not see why it would be secret testing of new naval gun.

    BTW the drawing above was not done by me...

    I saw lot of drawings, but what matter is real project, which passed stage of drawings and enter production.


    They reintroduced the Sverdlov class cruisers because they had 152mm guns and they wanted them to support their Ivan Rogov landing ships... what have they just laid down...  do you think there are any Sverdlov cruisers left to drag out of mothballs?

    So you think that they modernize biggest warship in world armed with most advance missile systems, in order to close him to well defend enemy shores and to provide arty support???? Very Happy That was newer role of Kirov class even in days of huge Soviet navy.



    They stated that they were going to introduce a navalised 152mm Coalition gun for the Navy... I would think it would make sense to replace the Bereg coastal gun, so they can justify making quite a few of them and in terms of design they could just be the land based Coalition version on the wheeled truck mount for minimal costs to buy and operate, but for at sea use it would make sense to fit them to heavy destroyers and cruisers too... the same way the 130mm guns were fitted to Sovremmeny class destroyers and Kirov class cruisers after the first one which had two 100mm gun mounts the later ones had a single twin 130mm gun mount  as fitted to the Sovs... which had two.
    Again: "They said" topic is what gun they will use instead of current 130mmx2 …. not what they said and they will maybe use in future.....



    The Army model is more urgent because enemy IFVs can't be penetrated at combat ranges with 30mm cannon any more so the 57mm round is necessary, but they are also making an air defence gun version for shooting down drones and munitions and aircraft, which is also going to enter service too.

    One company actually has a unified turret for land vehicles and naval use…
    http://roe.ru/eng/catalog/naval-systems/shipborne-weapons/au-220-m/


    So what is point of stating well known and undisputed facts? My point was that development of new 57 mm gun is known project that last for years and that they still do not use it. And you claim that they will use NOW gun whose development is not known or at least not for public.




    The old AK130 was 98 tons without ammo.... the new A192M is 30 tons without ammo.... yeah... they just reshaped the turret to make it look stealthy and that is why development of new Russian ships takes so long... take 68 tons off the turret shell of a gun mount is very tricky...   Rolling Eyes

    Try to be consistent it is not very hard......


    Weight that you posted is weight of dual gun. Single gun is ofcourse always much lighter.

    Just as example:

    Single mount:B-13: 11.8 tons (12.0 mt)
    duble mount: B-2LM: 48.23 tons (49 mt)




    Then what are they driving through Moscow in parades with Armata chassis and 152mm guns.... let alone the truck mounted versions...

    Ok, i wasnt precise enought i had dual mount in mind.
    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 6183
    Points : 6175
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 27 Empty Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  Isos on Sat Aug 22, 2020 11:43 am

    Advantage of designing ships with 152mm gun is that there will be enough space to upgrade it with a EM gun.

    With a 76mm it will be too short because EM will be pretty big.

    The other advantage is that with guided long range rounds you need 1 or 2 rounds per target. So you can allow yourself to carry less rounds and it's then better to carry bigger rounds to destroy more easily the targets with a bigger warhead.
    avatar
    marat

    Posts : 307
    Points : 303
    Join date : 2015-04-26

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 27 Empty Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  marat on Sat Aug 22, 2020 12:03 pm

    Isos wrote:Advantage of designing ships with 152mm gun is that there will be enough space to upgrade it with a EM gun.

    With a 76mm it will be too short because EM will be pretty big.

    The other advantage is that with guided long range rounds you need 1 or 2 rounds per target. So you can allow yourself to carry less rounds and it's then better to carry bigger rounds to destroy more easily the targets with a bigger warhead.

    And in last 50 years just one ship was designed having in mind such advantage... and that didn't went well Smile.

    I would like to see 203mm gun on new big Russian ships with range 60km or more and smart munition. But now I just do not have any reason to believe that they have 152 or 203 gun in acceptance stage.
    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 6183
    Points : 6175
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 27 Empty Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  Isos on Sat Aug 22, 2020 12:56 pm

    And in last 50 years just one ship was designed having in mind such advantage... and that didn't went well Smile.

    Guided long range rounds were not created/used during the cold war, it is fairly recent. They were limited by ballistic range of the guns and missiles were a better choice but they also took lot of space to allow big guns.

    Now long range guided rounds offer much more capabilities against new threats and the 152mm guns are already in mind of conceptors.

    The biggest ship they made is Gorshkov which is a 135m frigate. Of course they won't put a huge gun on it. The 130mm gun is already big for it.

    If they make a new cruise they will put a 152mm gun for sure.
    Big_Gazza
    Big_Gazza

    Posts : 2082
    Points : 2084
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 27 Empty Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  Big_Gazza on Sat Aug 22, 2020 3:25 pm

    marat wrote:My point was that development of new 57 mm gun is known project that last for years and that they still do not use it. And you claim that they will use NOW gun whose development is not known or at least not for public.

    So what?  No-one knew the Russians were actively developing an air-launched anti-ship version of Iskander until it was announced.  No-one knew they were actively developing an a nuclear-powered CM until it was announced.  No-one knew they were developing a tactical laser platform for point defense of ICBM bases until it was announced.

    For a long time people believed that Russia would replace the aborted Mistrals with the Priboy class, until the Ivan Rogov design was formally announced.

    You need to get real and stop believing that Russia doesn't have secret weapons development programs, or that the deatils of key conventional weapons develpments won't be shrouded in good old maskirovka  Very Happy

    When the Nahkimov finally departs the fitting-out quay for state trials, I reckon its even money that she will be sporting a navalised 2S35 Koalition 152mm arty, notwithstanding the lack of any public admission of such a program or manufacturer promos.

    marat wrote:Testing of Zirkon is not secret I do not see why it would be secret testing of new naval gun.

    Because a new arty can be tested in the manufacturers testing ground without prying eyes and with minimal ground preparations (and thereby covertly), while Zirkon needs a cast of hundreds and extensive ground launch prep at a known launch site that is routinely monitored by the enemy, needs a clear airspace to test, and can be detected by radars and spy stats.

    Also any detected testing of new missile systems is reported by US which wants to advertise "Russian aggression" or "threat" to its vassal states to keep them in line. Naval artillery just doesn't have the same threat level.
    Big_Gazza
    Big_Gazza

    Posts : 2082
    Points : 2084
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 27 Empty Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  Big_Gazza on Sat Aug 22, 2020 4:37 pm

    Ain't she a beautiful sight? russia

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 27 22-8971401-1eb3lp0go9a

    George1, kvs, LMFS and Hole like this post

    avatar
    marat

    Posts : 307
    Points : 303
    Join date : 2015-04-26

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 27 Empty Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  marat on Sat Aug 22, 2020 8:15 pm

    Ok, there is no point for further discussion, you believe that they will put 152 mm gun I think that will not be case. We will see... Any way when modernization should be completed?
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 25925
    Points : 26471
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 27 Empty Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  GarryB on Sun Aug 23, 2020 11:07 am

    1. You will not be destroying the port, you will capture the ports to use them. Only a moron would cause heavy damage to the ports. The only time destroying a naval point is acceptable is if you are retreating from it or if the enemy is dug in and refuses to leave but if you try and use those guns for that, then you don't know what your doing at all. So bringing up "let's bombard the ports" shows a clear lack of understanding of procedure on your end. Keep reading them internet articles.

    He said Ports were on the coastline... he never said landings would be performed at ports... which ports did that land in in D day?

    Ports are generally too heavily defended to attack directly with a landing force, but certainly ports can be attacked to disrupt the activities of the enemy... shelling a military navy port can do all sorts of damage beyond just sinking ships... if you sink one enemy refuelling tanker then you effect their ability to operate away from home port but if you shell their refuelling infrastructure in their port then the effects are vastly more damaging...

    Why would Russia not want to cause heavy damage to HATO ports during WWIII... it is not like they will want to use them later... and restricting the ability of the HATO navies to operate from home ports is good for Russia in such a situation...


    2. Bridges? that greatly depends on what country you are talking about and most small bridges can easily be bypassed lol. I find it funny when people try and bring up oddly specific points that really may or may not have any meaning depending on geographic location to argue. Unless it is a massive bridge it won't matter, this isn't WW2 lol.

    It of course depends on the location, but in some places bridges are critical for mobility and transport... destroying them restricts the enemy mobility, but you brought your own engineers to put up temporary bridges so your mobility wont be effected as much. Preventing the enemy from being mobile during a landing is critical to the success of any landing.

    They said many things 20 years ago they said they will have 20 Stereguschy class but still they do not have them.

    Did they give a timetable?

    Are you suggesting they collaborated with the Army to develop a new long range 152mm gun but are going to stick with 130mm guns instead... because they are much shorter ranged and fire a much lighter projectile...

    Testing of Zirkon is not secret I do not see why it would be secret testing of new naval gun.

    Everything is secret, but they do periodically announce certain things... mostly for political reasons... the US will be scared of Zircon entering service because of its performance, so there is value in announcing that... 152mm guns not so much.

    I saw lot of drawings, but what matter is real project, which passed stage of drawings and enter production.

    Do you think they intend to put drawings into service?

    So you think that they modernize biggest warship in world armed with most advance missile systems, in order to close him to well defend enemy shores and to provide arty support????

    The plans are for a 170km range with guided shells... why would they not want that on ships? That would outrange early model SS-N-22 Sunburn anti ship missiles... even a modest rate of fire of 50 rounds per minute would be pretty overwhelming for most small and medium sized ships...

    That was newer role of Kirov class even in days of huge Soviet navy.

    Rubbish... any landing force would require air cover so the Kuznetsov would be there to provide that and the Kirovs would be operating with the Kuznetsov...

    So what is point of stating well known and undisputed facts? My point was that development of new 57 mm gun is known project that last for years and that they still do not use it. And you claim that they will use NOW gun whose development is not known or at least not for public.

    They don't have any Mistral type ships in service so any landing force will be tiny at the moment so having 152mm guns is not needed right now... but they are laid down so in 5-8 years time they will need heavier naval gun support and an obvious way to get that would be to fit it to their current cruisers in the form of a gun upgrade from 130mm to 152mm. The gun itself is already developed... which is the hardest part... they always had plans to introduce it... that is why they developed it...

    I am stating facts you seem to be ignoring.

    New 32 ton HATO IFVs are not likely to be penetrated by 30mm cannon shells of any type at normal combat distances, which means the 30mm cannon on the BMP-2 and BMP-3 has been rendered redundant, they have developed the replacement in the form of two different 57mm guns... one being a former AA gun round and the other a clever use of a 57mm grenade launcher... I suspect the former will be a new AA type used on land and at sea effectively as a CIWS with guided and air burst shells, and the latter will likely be used as a standard BMP calibre gun with APFSDS rounds and large HE rounds... the fact that they are not in service right now is irrelevant... they also have 152mm tank guns which are also not being used because the 125mm seems to be effective enough right now.

    The difference for the Navy is that the helicopter carrier landing ships have been laid down so it makes sense to get a 152mm gun on a ship and operational.

    As the ammo develops it will only become more and more useful.


    Try to be consistent it is not very hard......


    Weight that you posted is weight of dual gun. Single gun is ofcourse always much lighter.

    Just as example:

    Single mount:B-13: 11.8 tons (12.0 mt)
    duble mount: B-2LM: 48.23 tons (49 mt)

    WHAT!!!!

    You were the one saying the new gun was just an old gun with a different shaped turret... did you even notice it had one less barrel when you said that?


    A192M is not actually new as, afaik, under the surface that is same old AK130, they made new turret for stealth ships. But maybe that will be the case now that they just give reshaped turret for old ak130 but from my point of view having in mind that Kirov is not stealth that is nonsense.

    The fact that it is 98 tons vs 30 tons AND a twin barrel gun vs a single barrel gun backs up my case that they are not the same gun with a different outer cover...

    Ok, i wasnt precise enought i had dual mount in mind.

    The land based dual mount gun adds too much weight and physical space to the design so they could no longer be carried in standard aircraft/train cars.

    The second gun had its own fully automatic dual ammo feed system, which for two guns means four feed channels... which just takes up too much space and adds too much weight.

    The naval version will almost certainly retain twin barrels because it does not need to fit in a plane or through a train tunnel.

    And rate of fire would be useful.

    The other advantage is that with guided long range rounds you need 1 or 2 rounds per target. So you can allow yourself to carry less rounds and it's then better to carry bigger rounds to destroy more easily the targets with a bigger warhead.

    Imagine the situation from the perspective of the enemy... emissions are detected from over 100km away but you can't be sure what it is... it might be an airborne Ka-31... then a few minutes later tiny ballistic projectiles start arriving... they are only about 150 or 160mm in diameter and are ramjet or possibly scramjet powered... they have a 30kg HEI warhead and have an optical seeker that uses IIR sensors to target specific parts of your ship.... and they are arriving two at a time at a rate of 50 shells a minute... you can't ignore them because while each is not anything like what would be needed to sink your ship each projectile can serious damage the system it hits and it seems to be targeting your guns and missile mounts and your radar antenna and your bridge....

    Being scramjet powered they might be coming in rather fast too...

    And in last 50 years just one ship was designed having in mind such advantage... and that didn't went well

    The Americans and the French also tried to make tank gun fired anti tank missiles... the American Shillaylah (Spelling) in 152mm calibre and the French system I think was 142mm calibre. To their credit the French didn't actually make their weapon or deploy it but the Americans deployed their system in large numbers on the Sheridan and a model of the M60 tank and they were awful... widely deployed in several conflicts and not a single example of a successful use despite all the money wasted the system was totally inferior to the much cheaper TOW mounted on an M113... which was used successfully.

    But there is no way the backward Soviets or Russians could succeed where the west had failed right?

    I would like to see 203mm gun on new big Russian ships with range 60km or more and smart munition. But now I just do not have any reason to believe that they have 152 or 203 gun in acceptance stage.

    Their 152mm gun already reaches 70km and they are expecting ranges of 170km to be achieved with "boosted rounds".

    Now long range guided rounds offer much more capabilities against new threats and the 152mm guns are already in mind of conceptors.

    New higher pressure barrels and new propellents and terminal guidance to make the extra range useful as well as new projectiles with built in propulsion should allow enormous increases in range and performance....

    So what? No-one knew the Russians were actively developing an air-launched anti-ship version of Iskander until it was announced. No-one knew they were actively developing an a nuclear-powered CM until it was announced. No-one knew they were developing a tactical laser platform for point defense of ICBM bases until it was announced.

    And ironically the west knew for a very long time about Klub and its various different models, yet was still shocked at the long range cruise missile attack capability the Russians showed in Syria... it seems they are reactive rather than proactive... perhaps in 5 years time they will start to develop 155mm naval guns...

    When the Nahkimov finally departs the fitting-out quay for state trials, I reckon its even money that she will be sporting a navalised 2S35 Koalition 152mm arty, notwithstanding the lack of any public admission of such a program or manufacturer promos.

    I agree, and it will likely be a twin barrel version as originally designed... the ground based model probably does not have a good enough rate of fire though so it might be a more navalised turret and ammo handling system they use to benefit from the advantages of space and recoil absorption that ships offer...


    Because a new arty can be tested in the manufacturers testing ground without prying eyes and with minimal ground preparations (and thereby covertly), while Zirkon needs a cast of hundreds and extensive ground launch prep at a known launch site that is routinely monitored by the enemy, needs a clear airspace to test, and can be detected by radars and spy stats.

    You can string a net above a 152mm gun turret to hide it from satellite view as well as Open skies monitoring aircraft, but with Zircon, you need an area a thousand kms long...

    Ok, there is no point for further discussion, you believe that they will put 152 mm gun I think that will not be case. We will see... Any way when modernization should be completed?

    I think it will be more than just a case of a land based turret being put on a ship, but there is no reason to believe they have not been working on a naval turret for some time now... they don't export cruisers so there is no value in advertising it for export like they do with their smaller calibre guns... they don't advertise Yasen or Borei class Subs either...

    The facts are they have said the 152mm Coalition gun will be used by the navy... they have just laid down two helicopter landing ships and they are upgrading their cruisers... if the new 152mm gun turret is ready they will likely want to test it by putting it on an upgraded Kirov... it would be the ideal low risk opportunity to iron out any bugs and take new rounds to sea for testing and use.

    They should certainly use the land based Coalition turret to replace the Bereg 130mm coastal gun system simply because it has a heavier shell and much much longer range.
    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 6183
    Points : 6175
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 27 Empty Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  Isos on Sun Aug 23, 2020 11:26 am

    SeigSoloyvov wrote:

    1. You will not be destroying the port, you will capture the ports to use them. Only a moron would cause heavy damage to the ports. The only time destroying a naval point is acceptable is if you are retreating from it or if the enemy is dug in and refuses to leave but if you try and use those guns for that, then you don't know what your doing at all. So bringing up "let's bombard the ports" shows a clear lack of understanding of procedure on your end. Keep reading them internet articles.

    2. Bridges? that greatly depends on what country you are talking about and most small bridges can easily be bypassed lol. I find it funny when people try and bring up oddly specific points that really may or may not have any meaning depending on geographic location to argue. Unless it is a massive bridge it won't matter, this isn't WW2 lol.

    3. Congrats, you will notice I said they aren't totally useless and do have some uses.

    NATO tanks are not amphibious. Europe is full of rivers, big rivers. Destroy the bridges and they have a real problem bypassing them.

    Of course you destroy a port if you have no intension to capture the country. India had to use stix missiles in the 70s to destroy fuel tanks in Karachi port. They are a node in enemy military action. Destroy it and they will be vulnerable.
    avatar
    mnztr

    Posts : 495
    Points : 525
    Join date : 2018-01-21

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 27 Empty Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  mnztr on Sun Aug 23, 2020 5:07 pm

    The Kirovs really are pretty ships, they remind of of the Scharnhorst

    Sponsored content

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 27 Empty Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Sat Sep 26, 2020 9:39 am