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


+56
calripson
Morpheus Eberhardt
magnumcromagnon
navyfield
collegeboy16
Hannibal Barca
Vann7
zg18
Dima
Arrow
Mindstorm
Notio
SU-41
AlfaT8
Flanky
NationalRus
Flyingdutchman
xeno
Hachimoto
eridan
dino00
KomissarBojanchev
Cyberspec
Mr.Kalishnikov47
psg
TheRealist
harsh
Shadåw
Sujoy
medo
coolieno99
gloriousfatherland
flamming_python
Firebird
TheArmenian
TR1
George1
GarryB
ahmedfire
runaway
Pervius
PAVN
nightcrawler
Serbia Forever 2
Russian Patriot
IronsightSniper
Austin
Farhad Gulemov
KRON1
sepheronx
Viktor
Jelena
Stealthflanker
RuStepan
Vladislav
Admin
60 posters

    Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 32146
    Points : 32674
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russian Navy: Status & News #1 - Page 28 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  GarryB Fri Sep 06, 2013 7:37 am

    Yes... it has a particularly high radar frequency (MMW band) and can determine the type of ship it is attacking too.

    A short range model would be useful... perhaps in the 300kg weight range with a flight range of perhaps 80-90km with a more compact seeker... perhaps an IIR seeker with a backup ARH radar sensor. A 30-40kg warhead that was SAPHEI... ie semi armour piercing high explosive incendiary... which means it will punch through the outer hull of the target and explode inside the ship and start fires...

    The UKSK model would need a 50kg solid rocket booster to launch it... give it fairly large fold out wings to reduce the required thrust and give it an efficient aerodynamic shape to keep its size down... its targets will not be military generally so it doesn't need to be supersophisticated... in fact a data link sending back IR video of the target would allow the launch platform to target the rudder, or engine area or the bridge if necessary of the target to get it to stop. It could cruise to the target at medium altitude to maximise speed and reduce fuel consumption and when it gets close it could perhaps increase the sweep of the large wings to reduce drag and increase speed and drop down to a sea skimming mode for the last 15km or so to the target.

    For military targets such a target would be easy to swat out of the sky, but most smugglers/pirates/illegal fishermen will likely never see what hit them.

    You could fit 3 or 4 missiles on top of each other for the length/depth of the UKSK tube system so you could carry 6-8 missiles in two tubes, with the remainder of the tubes fitted with anti sub and anti ship missiles of other types...
    avatar
    Austin


    Posts : 7618
    Points : 8015
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Russian Navy: Status & News #1 - Page 28 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  Austin Fri Sep 06, 2013 4:15 pm

    The Russian Navy

    avatar
    Austin


    Posts : 7618
    Points : 8015
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Russian Navy: Status & News #1 - Page 28 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  Austin Fri Sep 06, 2013 7:24 pm

    The documentary on Russian Navy states that Russia Navy has a fleet of total 100 Fleet and submarine and now ranks 5 behind US , UK , France ,India.

    Is that estimate accurate ?
    TR1
    TR1


    Posts : 5536
    Points : 5542
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Russian Navy: Status & News #1 - Page 28 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  TR1 Fri Sep 06, 2013 9:47 pm

    Austin wrote:The documentary on Russian Navy states that Russia Navy has a fleet of total 100 Fleet and submarine and now ranks 5 behind US , UK , France ,India.

    Is that estimate accurate ?
    The Military History channel is a joke generally, just FYI.
    sepheronx
    sepheronx


    Posts : 7085
    Points : 7351
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 32
    Location : Canada

    Russian Navy: Status & News #1 - Page 28 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  sepheronx Sat Sep 07, 2013 12:52 am

    Austin wrote:The documentary on Russian Navy states that Russia Navy has a fleet of total 100 Fleet and submarine and now ranks 5 behind US , UK , France ,India.

    Is that estimate accurate ?
    With more ssbm than India and UK. Its nuclear sub force is more than that of India... etc etc etc.

    History channel is not accurate with nearly anything.
    AlfaT8
    AlfaT8


    Posts : 2101
    Points : 2096
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    Russian Navy: Status & News #1 - Page 28 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  AlfaT8 Sat Sep 07, 2013 3:09 am

    I've heard in the past that the AEGIS system is impervious to any Soviet/Russian missile attack and is practically invincible at sea, is this true??
    Russian Navy: Status & News #1 - Page 28 400px-Aegis_Combat_System_eRussian Navy: Status & News #1 - Page 28 Image017
    TR1
    TR1


    Posts : 5536
    Points : 5542
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Russian Navy: Status & News #1 - Page 28 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  TR1 Sat Sep 07, 2013 3:20 am

    Heh, no different from any other claims of "invincibility".
    sepheronx
    sepheronx


    Posts : 7085
    Points : 7351
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 32
    Location : Canada

    Russian Navy: Status & News #1 - Page 28 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  sepheronx Sat Sep 07, 2013 3:20 am

    Does that really need answering? There is no such thing as invincible or impervious. Pretty much any defence system can be oversaturated, as well as they have still a headroom for failure, no such thing as 100% accuracy. As well, with newer defence technologies, there are newer offensive systems too, and systems like brahmos and onyx would be enough. AEGIS destroyers are good, but like any vunderwaff equipment being hyped by the MiC, nothing is invincible.

    Dont always trust "words" from an advertisement.
    TheArmenian
    TheArmenian


    Posts : 1883
    Points : 2030
    Join date : 2011-09-14

    Russian Navy: Status & News #1 - Page 28 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  TheArmenian Sat Sep 07, 2013 9:52 am

    Something new to me.
    A Nanushka class corvette armed with Kh-35 missiles.

    Russian Navy: Status & News #1 - Page 28 2mhekqd
    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 32146
    Points : 32674
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russian Navy: Status & News #1 - Page 28 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  GarryB Sat Sep 07, 2013 10:41 am

    The Russian navy is sizing down its range of weapons and that includes big heavy anti ship missiles their missile boats used to carry.

    For some boats 4-6 large heavy anti ship missiles were potent weapons, but today it makes more sense to carry 8-16 much smaller lighter missiles... and for existing vessels it makes more sense to replace older larger heavier missiles with more smaller lighter weapons.
    avatar
    SU-41


    Posts : 8
    Points : 12
    Join date : 2009-10-31
    Age : 37
    Location : algeria / algiers

    Russian Navy: Status & News #1 - Page 28 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  SU-41 Sat Sep 07, 2013 2:39 pm

    TheArmenian wrote:Something new to me.
    A Nanushka class corvette armed with Kh-35 missiles.

    Russian Navy: Status & News #1 - Page 28 2mhekqd
    It's a modernised Nanushka for Algerian navy
    avatar
    Vann7


    Posts : 5075
    Points : 5179
    Join date : 2012-05-16

    Russian Navy: Status & News #1 - Page 28 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  Vann7 Sun Sep 08, 2013 9:20 pm

    According to some military discussion site.. who have been posting updates

    http://www.charly015.blogspot.com/search/label/conflicto%20sirio

    Russian Navy: Status & News #1 - Page 28 Conflicto+sirio+buques+8+sep+2013

    No mention of chinnesse warships and submarines from Russia in the zone. if there are any..
    Viktor
    Viktor


    Posts : 5814
    Points : 6449
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 41
    Location : Croatia

    Russian Navy: Status & News #1 - Page 28 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  Viktor Mon Sep 09, 2013 1:43 am

    Vladivostok

    Russian Navy: Status & News #1 - Page 28 HtdVHNl
    Flyingdutchman
    Flyingdutchman


    Posts : 535
    Points : 551
    Join date : 2013-07-30
    Location : The Netherlands

    Russian Navy: Status & News #1 - Page 28 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  Flyingdutchman Mon Sep 09, 2013 9:08 pm

    AlfaT8 wrote:
    TR1 wrote:Murmansk.
    When is it leaving for the Mediterranean?? Wink 
    http://inserbia.info/news/2013/08/russian-aircraft-carrier-admiral-kuznetsov-to-be-sent-to-syrias-tartus/

    http://thediplomat.com/the-editor/2013/09/04/russias-aircraft-carrier-to-visit-syrian-naval-base/
    Viktor
    Viktor


    Posts : 5814
    Points : 6449
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 41
    Location : Croatia

    Russian Navy: Status & News #1 - Page 28 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  Viktor Wed Sep 11, 2013 4:20 pm

    New destroyers will come in two variants

    - conventional powerplant
    - nuclear powerplant Very Happy (this version will also have more firepower)

    The new destroyer of the Russian Navy will equip nuclear power plant РИА Новости http://ria.ru/spb/20130911/962500301.html#ixzz2easaHbIe
    avatar
    Austin


    Posts : 7618
    Points : 8015
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Russian Navy: Status & News #1 - Page 28 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  Austin Wed Sep 11, 2013 5:05 pm

    So we have two types of destroyer conventinal and nuclear.

    I think the conventional destroyer will be CODG types with displacement of around ~ 6000T
    The nuclear ones will be 12000-13000 T , ofcourse for political reason it will be called destroyer although its more appropriate to call it cruiser.

    I think from the 5000 T Class Gorshkov class Frigate a destroyer of 6 - 7 K class was missing so this will be the one conventional.

    avatar
    Hachimoto


    Posts : 143
    Points : 151
    Join date : 2013-02-08
    Age : 36

    Russian Navy: Status & News #1 - Page 28 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  Hachimoto Wed Sep 11, 2013 5:19 pm

    Austin wrote:So we have two types of destroyer conventinal and nuclear.

    I think the conventional destroyer will be CODG types with displacement of around ~ 6000T
    The nuclear ones will be 12000-13000 T , ofcourse for political reason it will be called destroyer although its more appropriate to call it cruiser.

    I think from the 5000 T Class Gorshkov class Frigate a destroyer of  6 - 7 K class was missing so this will be the one conventional.

    Really hope they will go as fast as possible with the building of both class and buy decent numbers of them not like actual ships.

    Russia need to very quickly Destroyers/cruisers to protect mainly it's interest and allies (well to get more money actually Wink )
    TR1
    TR1


    Posts : 5536
    Points : 5542
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Russian Navy: Status & News #1 - Page 28 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  TR1 Wed Sep 11, 2013 10:24 pm

    Viktor wrote:New destroyers will come in two variants

    - conventional powerplant
    - nuclear powerplant Very Happy (this version will also have more firepower)

    The new destroyer of the Russian Navy will equip nuclear power plant   РИА Новости http://ria.ru/spb/20130911/962500301.html#ixzz2easaHbIe
    They will decide on one it seems like, they are just making projects with both types of powerplants.

    Building both would be a terrible idea IMO. Just focus on one ship, and get a production line going.
    TR1
    TR1


    Posts : 5536
    Points : 5542
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Russian Navy: Status & News #1 - Page 28 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  TR1 Wed Sep 11, 2013 10:26 pm

    Hachimoto wrote:
    Austin wrote:So we have two types of destroyer conventinal and nuclear.

    I think the conventional destroyer will be CODG types with displacement of around ~ 6000T
    The nuclear ones will be 12000-13000 T , ofcourse for political reason it will be called destroyer although its more appropriate to call it cruiser.

    I think from the 5000 T Class Gorshkov class Frigate a destroyer of  6 - 7 K class was missing so this will be the one conventional.

    Really hope they will go as fast as possible with the building of both class and buy decent numbers of them not like actual ships.

    Russia need to very quickly Destroyers/cruisers to protect mainly it's interest and allies (well to get more money actually Wink)
    Russia needs to get 22350 frigates out, they are perfect ships for service in situations like Syria.
    Even 20385 would be fine in this role. Both programs are going slowly though, I shudder to think how slowly a destroyer will progress.
    TR1
    TR1


    Posts : 5536
    Points : 5542
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Russian Navy: Status & News #1 - Page 28 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  TR1 Wed Sep 11, 2013 10:40 pm

    Russian Navy: Status & News #1 - Page 28 Bbf922233abf

    Now that is a handsome little ship.
    Much better looker than the 21630 gunboats.
    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 32146
    Points : 32674
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russian Navy: Status & News #1 - Page 28 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  GarryB Thu Sep 12, 2013 2:29 am

    They will decide on one it seems like, they are just making projects with both types of powerplants.

    Building both would be a terrible idea IMO. Just focus on one ship, and get a production line going.
    Making a cheap simple (mass produced) destroyer and a more expensive nuclear powered model actually makes a lot of sense.

    If they go with cheap then they doom any carrier group to the speed and range of the slowest vessel in the group that will include destroyers... even if the carriers are nuclear powered they will have to move at the speed of the slowest vessel to maintain the group. Having lots of destroyers will not compensate the group for reduced speed and regular refuellings... remember if the group has to go from the Northern fleet to say Cuba that could mean two or three refuellings for a conventional destroyer... which means refuelling ships speed... about 16 knts. If all the ships are nukes then they can travel most of the time at up to double that speed the entire trip... speed is important.

    It also means they can optimise their force structure with cheaper conventional destroyers able to make port calls to countries that don't like nukes ( like NZ Very Happy ) and they can have them relatively cheaply, while still having the rather more capable and powerful more expensive ships.

    Lets face it... with standardisation the electronics and radar and systems and weapons will be similar... UKSK launchers, Redut launchers, etc etc... the difference will be numbers and the antenna size of the main radars plus of course the deployment range.

    They are working on new compact reactors, so their might not actually be that much of a size difference between the two different destroyer types... they have nuclear power generators they designed for satellites and space exploration that they could actually use as batteries for a diesel electric that would make rather more sense than any other AIP type.

    They had in the 1980s a reactor that was designed for a mission to Mars that had an operational life of about 13 years that could continuously generate about 200 MWs of electrical power. As a by product its cooling system could be used to heat a facility on Mars so the 200 MW could be used for things other than heating... which made it much more useful as heating would be about 30% of the power requirement for a base on Mars... having it generate hot liquids that can be used to heat the base just as a by product was a serious bonus and in a sub like a Kilo class having a heating system for use in polar regions would be very useful. In more tropical regions the seawater can be used to remove heat from the system, or more stealthily the water in the ballast tanks can be heated to reduce the external signature of the sub.

    From memory the reactor was 1m square and 4m long and could be used to continuously keep the batteries on a diesel electric topped up or directly power the sub. Put four on board and you could probably remove the diesel components and just have an all electric sub.
    avatar
    Notio


    Posts : 16
    Points : 16
    Join date : 2012-02-22

    Russian Navy: Status & News #1 - Page 28 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  Notio Thu Sep 12, 2013 2:36 am

    Flyingdutchman wrote:Syria Is not the reason they sended ships to the mediterranean. But  if all the arleigh burkes fire missiles at syria, is 4x 96 missiles is much much too much for the slava to intercept them but probably the us wont fire them all so the slava will be able to intercept alot of them. But as i was saying before they are not sending them for the conflict in syria.
    They don't carry 96 Tomahawks per ship. There is 96 Mark 41 VLS-cells per ship, but the same cells are also used for Harpoons and SAM-missiles. I think 56 tomahawks is in practice the maximum and it is plenty.
    TR1
    TR1


    Posts : 5536
    Points : 5542
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Russian Navy: Status & News #1 - Page 28 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  TR1 Thu Sep 12, 2013 4:18 am

    Instead of a cheaper 22350-turned-destroyer I would rather just have more 22350s.
    Time frame wise it is much more realistic, plus what would a ~6000 ton ship even improve on? Maybe more VLS, but the core capabilities like you said and blue-water capabilities are largely the same. 22350 has an extensive electronics suit, so I don't see a huge improvement occurring there.
    Ok, if you must have a bigger ship why not just do what was done with 20385, and make a slightly (500-1000) ton heavier ship by adding hull sections.

    A nuclear small cruiser makes more sense in terms of having new capabilities, but it also comes with a brand new price tag, building time, and all the associated headaches.

    Plus, with big money being spent on refitting Nakhmiov, Runavy will have several surface group centerpieces, so new ships won't be desperately needed.

    I don't see construction of a 10,000 + ton ship starting any earlier than the end of the decade. If MOD can't even pay reliably for frigates.....D:

    The other issue is shipyards. Until the new shipyards are brought online, Severnaya is the most active with new ships, and they are stacked with work till the end of the decade. Yantar will be interesting once they are done with 11356s....what else? Amur is twiddling with corvettes, I don't see it taking on anything as big as a new destroyer anytime soon.

    When we consider that the biggest issue facing Russia is ground forces and VVS modernization, I don't see the navy (aside from strategic projects) getting or needing enough dough to start splurging on big destroyers anytime soon.
    Or carriers, which I don't wanna even hear about till a decade from now at the earliest.
    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 32146
    Points : 32674
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russian Navy: Status & News #1 - Page 28 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  GarryB Thu Sep 12, 2013 4:32 am

    Having a few shipyards building ships is not OK... we want plenty of work for all of them... the fact that only a few yards can handle large ships at the moment is largely because only a few yards have been properly active building modern ships... increase the number and size of the ships being built and have more shipyards able to build ships.

    Having yards making small boats is critical as you need small boats too.

    I agree there is no need for new carriers this decade, but the ships they are building now need to be able to hold their own for much longer than older ships needed to, so making them bigger and more expensive might allow future growth in performance to allow them to stay in service longer meaning other types can be built when they would normally be making replacements for the ships they are building now.

    This longer view means better value for money and longer production runs. If they can make it modular enough the difference between a nuke and a conventional ship would be 2-3 sections that could perhaps be swapped out if needed/desired... I don't think an all nuke fleet is affordable but in 15 years time perhaps nuke propulsion will have evolved to the point where it is safe and efficient and cheaper than it is now... cheaper than fossil fuels.
    ahmedfire
    ahmedfire


    Posts : 1654
    Points : 1830
    Join date : 2010-11-11
    Location : The Land Of Pharaohs

    Russian Navy: Status & News #1 - Page 28 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  ahmedfire Thu Sep 12, 2013 2:16 pm

    Can China Sink A U.S. Aircraft Carrier?



    Twisted Evil 

    Sponsored content


    Russian Navy: Status & News #1 - Page 28 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Tue Jan 18, 2022 12:10 am