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
    mnztr

    Posts : 585
    Points : 615
    Join date : 2018-01-21

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 30 Empty Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  mnztr on Sat Nov 07, 2020 7:29 am

    kvs wrote:The only reason the Lazerv is not being actively modernized is because of budget constraints.   That's right, these days budget expenditures in Russia
    are constrained.   This was not an issue during the USSR period, but there were other serious problems instead.


    I don't agree. The whole Kirov expansion program is somewhat experimental. A lot if it is being developed ad hoc. The combat systems are probably based on the Gorhskov class, and we can see what problems that had. One of the key weapons Tsirkon is just starting flight trials. So yeah money IS a consideration, but at the outset no one knew for sure what the result will be and we still don't. If the result is less then stellar, it will be the only one. If it turns out really well, expect then it will be executed as program on the rest of the ships.
    Big_Gazza
    Big_Gazza

    Posts : 2134
    Points : 2136
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 30 Empty Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  Big_Gazza on Sat Nov 07, 2020 10:36 am

    The only "ad-hoc" components of the modernization is the technical specifics of the rebuild. These projects are COMPLEX and its impossible to have fully comprehensive technical documentation in place for fully scope the works required. When the Nahkimov went into dry dock there would have been no detailed design but a list of requirements from the government, a scope of works type document, mostly descriptive and lacking in specifics. The workpacks for actual work is prepared by the shipyard, and only after the affected areas are inspected and assessed, and the detailed structural, mechanical, and electrical/instrumentation designs are developed. I've been involved in shipyard campaigns and its a lengthy and rather unrefined process. Contrary to what the average Joe might think, there is no pre-prepared master set of "blueprints" to work from.

    Problems with the Gorshkov was simply the usual teething issues that could be expected from a completely new generation of weapons and sensors and systems. All ships of a new generation suffer these sorts of problems, and the 22350s had to cope with the additional issues of a lack of engines (due to Ukropi trechery) plus an MIC that was still in the process of rebuilding itself following the post-breakup meltdown. Given Russias problems since 1991, I think they have done remarkably well to this point, and they have certainly surpassed the expectations (delusions) of their Western adversaries.

    Credit needs to be given where it is due.

    Hole and lyle6 like this post

    avatar
    mnztr

    Posts : 585
    Points : 615
    Join date : 2018-01-21

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 30 Empty Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  mnztr on Sat Nov 07, 2020 6:53 pm

    You have to remember the Kirovs are pretty old, so the design needs to be digitized before design can begin. Also as you mentioned the pandoras box needs to be opened. Then over a very lengthy project like this all kinds of opportunities arise to improve the project, so when reconditioning is taking longer, then other opportunities arise, better missiles, better electronics. Why load up with Kaliber when Tsirkon is almost ready? S500 is coming, better radar ETC. After all this ship is a showcase as well as a weapon. Basic weapons spaces are defined but what is to be done with these spaces is always under discussion iin this type of project.

    Big_Gazza likes this post

    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 6617
    Points : 6607
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 30 Empty Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  Isos on Sat Nov 07, 2020 7:18 pm

    You are quite late. They already did that and have almost finished to modernize one.

    S-500 isn't needed for the navy. That's a land vased system for protecting against strategic weapons.

    S-400 with 40N6, 48N6 and 9M96 in one unified VLS is what they need.
    avatar
    mnztr

    Posts : 585
    Points : 615
    Join date : 2018-01-21

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 30 Empty Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  mnztr on Sun Nov 08, 2020 4:54 am

    Isos wrote:You are quite late. They already did that and have almost finished to modernize one.

    S-500 isn't needed for the navy. That's a land vased system for protecting against strategic weapons.

    S-400 with 40N6, 48N6 and 9M96 in one unified VLS is what they need.

    I don't think its remotely close to finished yet. The hard part has just started
    lancelot
    lancelot

    Posts : 21
    Points : 23
    Join date : 2020-10-18

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 30 Empty Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  lancelot on Sun Nov 08, 2020 6:57 am

    mnztr wrote:You have to remember the Kirovs are pretty old, so the design needs to be digitized before design can begin. Also as you mentioned the pandoras box needs to be opened. Then over a very lengthy project like this all kinds of opportunities arise to improve the project, so when reconditioning is taking longer, then other opportunities arise, better missiles, better electronics. Why load up with Kaliber when Tsirkon is almost ready? S500 is coming, better radar ETC. After all this ship is a showcase as well as a weapon. Basic weapons spaces are defined but what is to be done with these spaces is always under discussion iin this type of project.

    Right. I would also add that nuclear reactors used to be designed with the idea of lasting around 30 years. With modern upgrades they can last up to 60 years at best. The older Kirovs are like 40 years old by now. I doubt they still have much reactor life in them. Even if all it takes is a reactor refurbishment to get them operational when you consider all the changes needed to make the design modern like changing all the cabling, electronics, sensors, weapon systems, etc it makes you wonder if it wouldn't be simpler just to build a new hull. They can build a Project 22220 icebreaker in 6-7 years. How long has the Admiral Nakhimov been in this upgrade process? Mind you I think upgrading one or two ships to use as laboratories to develop the weapon systems is still viable, but doing this to the whole fleet is more questionable.
    I think post 2023, when the last Project 22220 icebreaker is launched, and the RITM-400 reactor is finished and the shipyards at St. Pete are empty, then we will see the nuclear cruiser program back on the table.

    I think mentioning the S500 in a Russian naval design might not make that much sense because the launchers are supposed to be huge. It is an anti-ICBM weapon like THAAD not an anti-aircraft weapon.
    I think what they need is a naval S400 and lots and lots of cruise missiles. Preferably in a unified launcher format so that the enemy won't know if you're carrying a land attack or air defense load.

    YMMV.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 26604
    Points : 27144
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 30 Empty Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  GarryB on Sun Nov 08, 2020 10:22 am

    S-500 isn't needed for the navy. That's a land vased system for protecting against strategic weapons.

    The S-500 will be at the core of the IADS they develop for their carrier groups... it will likely develop into the weapon that shoots down American Zircons when they are ready for active service... they will also defeat any ballistic weapon they might come up with based on IRBM or SLBM designs similar to Chinese anti carrier missiles.

    It would also allow a Russian carrier group to be sent to a location mid flight path for western ICBMs and SLBMs and enable them to get shots at warheads as they fly past.

    The only "ad-hoc" components of the modernization is the technical specifics of the rebuild. These projects are COMPLEX and its impossible to have fully comprehensive technical documentation in place for fully scope the works required.

    They have developed modular weapon systems for all their vessels and also modular sensors and electronic equipment, but it will be a while before they can design and build the custom designed new large ships. In the mean time they have old ships that were in no way intended to carry the new modular weapons and sensors and equipment.

    They can either make it a stopgap and therefore essentially fit Gorshkov level stuff, or they can further develop the enlarged arrays and sensors that would be going on their new large ships along with extra weapons launchers over the number fitted to smaller vessels.

    Obviously it will take a bit of work to work out how to cram standardised weapons and sensors into a ship that was never designed to take the, so the fit is not going to be snug and perfect, but getting these systems onto the ships and working makes them orders of magnitude more capable than the original vessels with their old gear.

    Testing new gear like 152mm artillery guns as well as perhaps Pantsir and improved TOR and perhaps even a few 57mm gun turrets, as well as lots of vertical launch missile systems for TOR and Redut and UKSK means an enormous variety of weapons can be carried, and new much bigger weapon sensors like large radar arrays can be tested on a real ship. New propulsion options can be tested too... the ship with the problematic reactor... take it out and put in a new system that will be used on new ships so it gets testing before the new cruisers are even laid down.

    Modifying and testing these old cruisers will give them experience with the modular weapons in larger numbers and bigger sensors and perhaps new reactors with better performance... if it works well then the existing complex system could be replaced and made into a pure nuclear powered ship that is faster and with more available power all the time and of course able to get places much faster with less material needed to support it operationally.

    They want to go to nuclear power for the destroyers and new cruisers and carriers so this is a chance to test them out for real...

    Right. I would also add that nuclear reactors used to be designed with the idea of lasting around 30 years. With modern upgrades they can last up to 60 years at best.

    Actually modern designs could be created that run for 40 years without needing refuelling, which would make them much more affordable and much more desirable too.

    The older Kirovs are like 40 years old by now. I doubt they still have much reactor life in them. Even if all it takes is a reactor refurbishment to get them operational when you consider all the changes needed to make the design modern like changing all the cabling, electronics, sensors, weapon systems, etc it makes you wonder if it wouldn't be simpler just to build a new hull.

    Even if they started building a brand new cruiser tomorrow it would be 10 years before it would hit the water and that assumes the design is finalised now.

    Upgrading an old cruiser will not give you the same quality ship but the Kirovs are big so there is plenty of room... the British often had problems with their new ships because their newer weapons were often bigger and heavier than their old weapons and with more electronics and support systems they rapidly ran out of space. With these Soviet ships the replacement of 1980s electronics with 21st C electronics means replacing building sized main frames with laptop sized single rack computers that are 100 times more powerful than the old building sized systems. The main missiles have gone from 7.5 tons to 2.5 tons and everything is generally smaller and lighter. Improvements in cabling mean a bunch of wires the width of a rubbish bin lid can be replaced by fibre optics narrower than your wrist, yet the communications speed is 10,000 times faster in both directions.

    Right now they have some old ships or nothing... with the old ships they are big and available... they wont be as good as a scratch built newbuild cruiser, but they are better than nothing and offer an opportunity to test a range of new technologies and systems without worrying about a from scratch totally new design.

    They could develop it in stages... they could use the Lazarev and its wonky reactor as a propulsion testing ship and do some basic standard upgrades. On another ship they could try fitting super large super long range AESA radar arrays for operating S-500 missiles (the 2,500km range system that looks up into space for "targets")... how cool would it be to be sitting in the Atlantic Ocean tracking the ISS as it speeds over...

    They could have three different upgrade packages testing different things and when they have a bit of experience under their belts with these upgrades they can decide whether to apply each upgrade to the other two ships... when all the bugs are worked out from all three upgrades they should have some very capable ships and will be much better prepared to design a from scratch brand new cruiser replacement for them...

    I think mentioning the S500 in a Russian naval design might not make that much sense because the launchers are supposed to be huge. It is an anti-ICBM weapon like THAAD not an anti-aircraft weapon.

    THAAD is barely an Anti IRBM like weapon... S-300V and S-400 are both better systems already... S-500 will be much better... and necessary.

    It will be their defence from Zircon type weapons when they become available in the west.
    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 6617
    Points : 6607
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 30 Empty Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  Isos on Sun Nov 08, 2020 10:33 am

    mnztr wrote:

    I don't think its remotely close to finished yet. The hard part has just started

    What do you think they were doing during Nakhimov modernization. They of course developed the new systems. We will see them only when they put them on the ship. It's not because you don't see pics now that thry aren't ready.

    The S-500 will be at the core of the IADS they develop for their carrier groups... it will likely develop into the weapon that shoots down American Zircons when they are ready for active service... they will also defeat any ballistic weapon they might come up with based on IRBM or SLBM designs similar to Chinese anti carrier missiles.

    By the time they will have S-600 in service...
    avatar
    mnztr

    Posts : 585
    Points : 615
    Join date : 2018-01-21

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 30 Empty Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  mnztr on Mon Nov 09, 2020 2:41 am

    Ya so you just expect they will throw it all in and flip the switch? lol. There is complex integration work to be done testing, reconfig etc etc Who knows how their plans may have changed since the hull took so long to recondition? There are also new emerging technologies they may want to add to "future proof" the ship.

    Big_Gazza likes this post

    Big_Gazza
    Big_Gazza

    Posts : 2134
    Points : 2136
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 30 Empty Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  Big_Gazza on Mon Nov 09, 2020 9:29 am

    lancelot wrote:
    mnztr wrote:You have to remember the Kirovs are pretty old, so the design needs to be digitized before design can begin. Also as you mentioned the pandoras box needs to be opened. Then over a very lengthy project like this all kinds of opportunities arise to improve the project, so when reconditioning is taking longer, then other opportunities arise, better missiles, better electronics. Why load up with Kaliber when Tsirkon is almost ready? S500 is coming, better radar ETC. After all this ship is a showcase as well as a weapon. Basic weapons spaces are defined but what is to be done with these spaces is always under discussion iin this type of project.

    Right. I would also add that nuclear reactors used to be designed with the idea of lasting around 30 years. With modern upgrades they can last up to 60 years at best. The older Kirovs are like 40 years old by now. I doubt they still have much reactor life in them. Even if all it takes is a reactor refurbishment to get them operational when you consider all the changes needed to make the design modern like changing all the cabling, electronics, sensors, weapon systems, etc it makes you wonder if it wouldn't be simpler just to build a new hull. They can build a Project 22220 icebreaker in 6-7 years. How long has the Admiral Nakhimov been in this upgrade process? Mind you I think upgrading one or two ships to use as laboratories to develop the weapon systems is still viable, but doing this to the whole fleet is more questionable.
    I think post 2023, when the last Project 22220 icebreaker is launched, and the RITM-400 reactor is finished and the shipyards at St. Pete are empty, then we will see the nuclear cruiser program back on the table.

    I think mentioning the S500 in a Russian naval design might not make that much sense because the launchers are supposed to be huge. It is an anti-ICBM weapon like THAAD not an anti-aircraft weapon.
    I think what they need is a naval S400 and lots and lots of cruise missiles. Preferably in a unified launcher format so that the enemy won't know if you're carrying a land attack or air defense load.

    YMMV.

    Reactor design life assumes that the reactors in question are operational over the projected lifespan.  Sitting at the pier tied up with the reactor shutdown for well over a decade doesn't use up reactor life (minimal neutron damage to the metallurgy).  The Nahkimov has decades of life left in her firebox, the others as well.

    BTW if reactors were limited to 30 years most of the US CVNs would be looking at decommissioning soon.  They aren't, and your pulling numbers out of the nether doesn't mean squat.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 26604
    Points : 27144
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 30 Empty Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  GarryB on Mon Nov 09, 2020 11:26 am

    The things they are developing for a cruiser upgrade will be designed to operate on cruisers... upgraded or new build.

    It is not like they will be putting in a special radar they never intend to use on anything ever again so the electric and data connections needed to make it work will be pretty standard and the battle management and net centric IADS system they fit to the upgraded cruisers will essentially be directly related but of course a much earlier version of whatever they will be putting into their new build cruisers they lay down in 5 or 10 years time.

    In terms of weapons systems they will be mostly the same as those fitted to smaller ships... they will just have a lot more modules than they could fit on smaller vessels, but because they will be fitting them where they can fit them there wont be as many as they will have on a custom designed cruiser... but that is no big deal.

    There will be integration problems but there are going to be development and integration problems anyway... might as well start working them out now. so they don't end up making mistakes like Ford or Zumwalt or LCS...

    They could certainly fit a 152mm gun mount and start working out the bugs and get some real on sea testing done... send it to Syria for some testing...
    lancelot
    lancelot

    Posts : 21
    Points : 23
    Join date : 2020-10-18

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 30 Empty Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  lancelot on Wed Nov 11, 2020 6:15 am

    Big_Gazza wrote:
    ...
    Reactor design life assumes that the reactors in question are operational over the projected lifespan.  Sitting at the pier tied up with the reactor shutdown for well over a decade doesn't use up reactor life (minimal neutron damage to the metallurgy).  The Nahkimov has decades of life left in her firebox, the others as well.

    BTW if reactors were limited to 30 years most of the US CVNs would be looking at decommissioning soon.  They aren't, and your pulling numbers out of the nether doesn't mean squat.

    They aren't. But like I said, while they can last longer it requires major refurbishment. Just search for "thermal annealing nuclear reactor".
    Russia dominates this technology also, they have done it in civilian nuclear reactors. But you need to put the reactor offline for a year or two at least.
    https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Rosatom-launches-annealing-technology-for-VVER-100

    What a lot of people forget though is that it takes time to ramp down a nuclear reactor. It is not instant on or off. Even if a ship is peer side it doesn't mean the reactor is offline.
    Also, a lot of those US carriers are in fact supposed to be decommissioned. One example is the Harry S. Truman. Which is about as old as some of the cruisers we are talking about.
    The cost of the overhaul of the ship and reactor is so high you might as well build a new ship. But then again that is with US private contractors.
    kvs
    kvs

    Posts : 7424
    Points : 7573
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Canuckistan

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 30 Empty Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  kvs on Wed Nov 11, 2020 6:49 am

    The main issue with ship reactors is refueling. The refueling cycle is about 10 years.

    https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/non-power-nuclear-applications/transport/nuclear-powered-ships.aspx

    This article claims that US carrier reactors last 50 years and submarine reactors last 30-40 years. That sounds about right.

    avatar
    mnztr

    Posts : 585
    Points : 615
    Join date : 2018-01-21

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 30 Empty Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  mnztr on Wed Nov 11, 2020 6:53 am

    lancelot wrote:
    Big_Gazza wrote:
    ...
    Reactor design life assumes that the reactors in question are operational over the projected lifespan.  Sitting at the pier tied up with the reactor shutdown for well over a decade doesn't use up reactor life (minimal neutron damage to the metallurgy).  The Nahkimov has decades of life left in her firebox, the others as well.

    BTW if reactors were limited to 30 years most of the US CVNs would be looking at decommissioning soon.  They aren't, and your pulling numbers out of the nether doesn't mean squat.

    They aren't. But like I said, while they can last longer it requires major refurbishment. Just search for "thermal annealing nuclear reactor".
    Russia dominates this technology also, they have done it in civilian nuclear reactors. But you need to put the reactor offline for a year or two at least.
    https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Rosatom-launches-annealing-technology-for-VVER-100

    What a lot of people forget though is that it takes time to ramp down a nuclear reactor. It is not instant on or off. Even if a ship is peer side it doesn't mean the reactor is offline.
    Also, a lot of those US carriers are in fact supposed to be decommissioned. One example is the Harry S. Truman. Which is about as old as some of the cruisers we are talking about.
    The cost of the overhaul of the ship and reactor is so high you might as well build a new ship. But then again that is with US private contractors.

    No one in the public domain knows how much operational time that reactors has had. Its sat dormant for years and this ship was not heavily used.As far as I can tell the ship really only had 10 operational years. When they mothballed her, its possible the reactor was defulled or put into some sort of dormant state.
    LMFS
    LMFS

    Posts : 2278
    Points : 2278
    Join date : 2018-03-03

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 30 Empty Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  LMFS on Wed Nov 11, 2020 8:09 am

    kvs wrote:The main issue with ship reactors is refueling.  The refueling cycle is about 10 years.

    https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/non-power-nuclear-applications/transport/nuclear-powered-ships.aspx

    This article claims that US carrier reactors last 50 years and submarine reactors last 30-40 years.  That sounds about right.


    In naval field apparently sometimes highly enriched fuel is used that allows to bring the refuelling cycle to 20 or 30 years, both US and Russia do this.
    avatar
    mnztr

    Posts : 585
    Points : 615
    Join date : 2018-01-21

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 30 Empty Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  mnztr on Wed Nov 11, 2020 5:08 pm

    LMFS wrote:
    kvs wrote:The main issue with ship reactors is refueling.  The refueling cycle is about 10 years.

    https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/non-power-nuclear-applications/transport/nuclear-powered-ships.aspx

    This article claims that US carrier reactors last 50 years and submarine reactors last 30-40 years.  That sounds about right.


    In naval field apparently sometimes highly enriched fuel is used that allows to bring the refuelling cycle to 20 or 30 years, both US and Russia do this.

    US CVNs have a mid life refuelling at 25 years but the new ones are good for 50 years, same with the new subs.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 26604
    Points : 27144
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 30 Empty Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  GarryB on Thu Nov 12, 2020 7:31 am

    Well the fact of the matter is that all four Kirov class cruisers had nuclear reactors. The two they seem certain to want to upgrade are the easiest picks because their reactors seem to be running fine.

    The Lazarev sounds like it had reactor problems, but think about it.

    Whether you scrap it completely or take the reactor out and replace it... you are going to have to deal with the old reactor.

    Whether you fix it or take it out and replace it or just take it out and scrap the ship you are going to have to take it out or continue using it.

    Presumably they have new NPP designs they intend to use in future destroyers and cruisers and aircraft carriers... hell, they use them in icebreakers.

    A compact NPP designed for military vessels that could also be used in subs would be a useful thing all round and a ship the size of the Lazarev is big enough to test one or two different designs at once.

    For the original design they lacked a reactor powerful enough to push a ship that size around at full speed so they needed a system to boost available power for high speed dashes... new more powerful reactors would be the best solution in terms of performance... preferably just two would be best in terms of battle damage reduction, and this would be an excellent chance to test some viable systems.

    At some stage you are going to have to develop new reactors anyway and this offers a chance to test and get some experience now.

    If it turns out to be a dog... well they don't need to keep it in service forever... it could get improved reactors fitted later to try to correct the problems... and if they work much better then those reactors could be used to upgrade the other two Kirov types, or used in Destroyers so they are laid down with mature tested propulsion systems at the least.

    With good design these new reactors could be good for 50 years operation with refuelling.
    Big_Gazza
    Big_Gazza

    Posts : 2134
    Points : 2136
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 30 Empty Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  Big_Gazza on Thu Nov 12, 2020 9:39 am

    GarryB wrote:The Lazarev sounds like it had reactor problems, but think about it.

    People keep saying this but it isn't true. Kirov/Uskakov has reactor problems, not Lazarev. Her reactor was de-fueled back in 2005 IIRC allowing her to be mothballed without infrastructure support, while Ushakov remains hot and tied up outside Zvezdochka under supervision.

    LMFS and Kiko like this post

    avatar
    mnztr

    Posts : 585
    Points : 615
    Join date : 2018-01-21

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 30 Empty Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  mnztr on Sat Nov 14, 2020 1:03 am

    So the 5th Kirov was cancelled and the CVN was cancelled. There is probably a good chance there is a reactor available that was made for these projects. Since the ship will be having major surgery anyway, maybe they will install a new reactor
    Gibraltar
    Gibraltar

    Posts : 37
    Points : 39
    Join date : 2018-09-22

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 30 Empty Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  Gibraltar on Sun Nov 15, 2020 2:52 am

    Availability of OK-650 reactors should'nt be a problem as they powered everything from typhoons to icebreakers with them. BUT it's a nonsense to make a so heavy effort as needed to remove reactors from a surface ship for swapping them with new but same-old-design ones obliging to service that odd thermal boiler overheating "speed boosting" system too. Remember that that system was'nt an insane sophistication from a mad soviet party engineer but was necessary for that leviathans to reach speeds in excess of 26 knots that even with two OK-650 reactors at full throttle they don't sailed.
    Definetely I think they'll never swap reactors only but in case of old reactors removal they'll remove the complete power plant in direction to gave that cruiser a full nuclear propulsion design with new generation, life(or at least half-life)fuelled, more reliable and more compact reactors; at this point if they don't want to put in there some conference hall, a gentlemen club or tennis courts they'll have so much room to store a ka-27 squadron or stuff it with even more sensors, shells and combat devices. BTW this is a total "poethic" path, a nuclear power plant swap on such a ship combined with the now already predictable (since nakhimov) modernization costs it's a fool just thinking at.
    avatar
    mnztr

    Posts : 585
    Points : 615
    Join date : 2018-01-21

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 30 Empty Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  mnztr on Sun Nov 15, 2020 5:46 am

    According to Wiki they use KN-3 reactors. I think the problem was how to throttle up the reactors quickly. They had 2x 300 MW reactors fer gawd sakes. Even at 30% conversion efficiency that is 280K SHP, and the ship is listed at 140K shp. So I suspect they run the reactors at about 30% power and 20Knots and the oil superheaters are there for response time...maybe they even only run one reactor at a time.
    Gibraltar
    Gibraltar

    Posts : 37
    Points : 39
    Join date : 2018-09-22

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 30 Empty Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  Gibraltar on Sun Nov 15, 2020 5:35 pm

    You're right, not Ok-650 but KN-3 reactors, BTW maybe you miss how much electrical energy consumes a combat station like that with all her sensors, hydraulics, electronics of her times, with very low efficiency for today standards, so it's not too wrong to assume that about half of her reactors thermal power was spent for electrical power generation (even less than 30% efficiency conversion).
    avatar
    mnztr

    Posts : 585
    Points : 615
    Join date : 2018-01-21

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 30 Empty Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  mnztr on Sun Nov 15, 2020 6:34 pm

    It had seperate 4x3 MW turbo generators to power the ship. 12 MW is quite a bit of electrical power for a ship of that era.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 26604
    Points : 27144
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 30 Empty Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  GarryB on Tue Nov 17, 2020 2:36 am

    By the time they will have S-600 in service...

    I suspect the S-600 will replace Rocket propulsion with rocket/scramjet propulsion for much greater range and much higher flight speed for interceptions inside the atmosphere... rocket for outside of course.

    So the 5th Kirov was cancelled and the CVN was cancelled. There is probably a good chance there is a reactor available that was made for these projects. Since the ship will be having major surgery anyway, maybe they will install a new reactor

    There was another ship that used the same hull... it was huge and it was fitted with radar... it was either a spy ship or a space tracking ship... I seem to think it was only scrapped in the last few years... it was too expensive to operate for what it was...

    The reality is that they have some very large ship available to them. It is going to be a while before they can afford to build brand new very large ships so for the moment these vessels are an opportunity to keep a long range ship capacity.

    They don't have to be super ships with thousands of missiles, because they don't intend to keep them for the next 100 years.

    They are not cheap... no big ship will ever be cheap.

    Scrap them and you have nothing.

    With an upgrade you get a ship able to travel anywhere in the world with decent self defence capacity on its own... remember cruiser sized ships are ships big enough to defend themselves and other ships around them simply because they have air defence missiles and guns in sufficient quantity and type to form a decent IADS on their own. Any other ship operating with them can coordinate their systems and sensors and weapons and make defence even stronger.

    This is an opportunity to test new hardware that can be tested in labs but testing in labs is not the same as having it go to sea on a large ship.

    Testing new propulsion and sensors and equipment and systems is hugely valuable and will make the new destroyers and new cruisers that they eventually build much better ships because they will be using tried and tested equipment that has been used together.

    Imagine not finding out there were arrester gear problems on the K in Syria... imagine a confrontation at sea where it was found... that would have cost lives... which is why you test and why you exercise...

    You're right, not Ok-650 but KN-3 reactors, BTW maybe you miss how much electrical energy consumes a combat station like that with all her sensors, hydraulics, electronics of her times, with very low efficiency for today standards, so it's not too wrong to assume that about half of her reactors thermal power was spent for electrical power generation (even less than 30% efficiency conversion).

    And all new electrics... fiber optic cables for data transmission, and new electric drives that are rather more effective and efficient... replacing arm launchers and rotary internal launchers with fixed cell launchers... it all makes a difference...

    But testing new reactor designs is worth it... even if they only try it on one ship... the purpose being more information and data for designing new cruisers and destroyers. If it works out really well they might consider applying it to the other Kirovs they are upgrading but even a big improvement might not be that important if it is expensive... it might be better to save the money and spend it on more frigates now and fast track the design of the all new destroyers and cruisers.

    The point is that if they can test new reactors now on real ships their choices and decisions will have a more sound base in reality and they are less likely to cock the designs up.

    Big_Gazza likes this post

    Hole
    Hole

    Posts : 3362
    Points : 3360
    Join date : 2018-03-24
    Age : 44
    Location : Merkelland

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 30 Empty Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  Hole on Tue Nov 17, 2020 12:17 pm

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 30 000165
    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 30 0002_b10
    The ship uses the same hull and reactor as the Kirov class but it was build from scratch. It was launched in 83 and finished in 89.

    GarryB and tanino like this post


    Sponsored content

    Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] - Page 30 Empty Re: Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Mon Nov 23, 2020 5:13 pm