Project 22800: "Karakurt" class missile ship

SeigSoloyvov wrote:I would assume by now people here would know not to take a model at face value, I guess I was wrong.

You say that and yet the only thing that was wrong on the very early display cae plastic model of the Kurganets with its 57mm was the
exact placement of the Bulat missiles.

The models are to be regarded as possibilities and indications of the direction that the military intends to go, these are models shown to the government not fanart to placate the public.

 

The model you posted is basically a frigate with those dimensions, they are making frigates already so yes pure fantasy.

Frigate by what definition exactly? It appears rather small for a frigate...

You seem to want to deny that the Russian navy can create vastly superior ships because your nation cannot build anything but under armed tin cans whenever not building an AA barge to escort thier carriers and even then the only thing that these AA barges have going for them is missile count.

@ moderators This is intended to be a criticism of the post and likely ideas/reasoning (pointing out denial and trolling) behind it not the poster, though it may be easy to get offended by, could someone please provide clarity on posts of this type?

They already have light frigate/corvettes designs that are much better suited to carry the weapons showed on that taller karakurt. They have Steregoushchy design and they also have the Gepard that is a family of designs.

They are less armed than this karakurt but they can be equiped with more weapons if you want to use them as a missile boat like they intend to use the karakurt for few hours just to launch missiles off the coast. Helicopter pad and hangar can be removed for more room for weapons.

The big karakurt is heavy with more powerfull engines but still a small size which means less space for the crew and less efficiency at sea.  That's a waste of time and money to make them. Missile boats are missile boats. It's already good they have a pantsir and uksk on such a small boat.

If they want more weapon use a real corvette design.

Isos wrote:They already have light frigate/corvettes designs that are much better suited to carry the weapons showed on that taller karakurt. They have Steregoushchy design and they also have the Gepard that is a family of designs...

Gepard is designed around Ukrainian engines, it's a dead end (it's also obsolete)

Steregushi has twice the size, range, crew, endurance and is clearly a whole different category of vessels

Unlike Karakurts they are multirole ships

But most important thing is that they can build 10 Karakurts in the time it takes to build one Steregushi, this was proven in practice

Russia has specific local areas that need to be kept clear of submarines for which they currently use Grisha-class ships that are approaching expiration date, it makes perfect sense to take standard Karakurt, add sonar package, install Paket in the back, load anti-sub missiles in those 8 UKSK cells and make them in bulk for this purpose

This would both fulfill local anti-sub requirements (inside range of coastal aviation and AA systems) and free up ships like Steregushis to operate further out

That's the antenna of the pantsir S2. Ground SM variant has a newer radar which should be better than this one. They seem to have kept the older one for the naval variant.

It is a Corvette essentially with four AESA radars... it should be the best most powerful thing in the world shouldn't it?

I still prefer the idea of a dedicated AA version that skips the UKSK & even the 76mm to get a decent radar/cell-count combo.

A dedicated air defence ship makes sense 50 years ago to support an aircraft carrier, but for a small coastal patrol vessel an all round armament makes rather more sense.

When you have single purpose boats you generally need to operate them all in groups so they are not vulnerable... which makes them expensive.

If all your boats are multipurpose then operating them in groups magnifies their effectiveness, but also means they can be left alone too.

For things like sub hunting you wont be using one boat anyway... they always work in teams otherwise the sub might turn around and start hunting the hunter.

IMO 1 in a squadron with a couple of Pantsir-M boats would be more effective than equal number of boats with 8* Redut + weak radar each.

The fact that they will be operating in Russian waters suggests their radar coverage wont be much of a problem and other ships and aircraft and even satellites nearby can contribute to their view of the world which should be pretty detailed.

Thanks all for the black paint replies. Fascinating.

Sometimes the simplest solutions are the best...

Ahhh... you are getting black soot over my nice fresh new paint.... well paint it black then and no one will notice... john will notice... he notices little things...

Redut with only 9m96 family is a failure. They use not even half of the internal space.

The most recent articles mention 400km range missiles which must be S-400 missiles... which suggests if it can take S-400 sized missiles then the tubes are not the size we think they are and that the number of S-350 missiles shown previously in them could be quadrupled because each of those tubes with large liners must also be able to take the much bigger 400km range S-400 missiles, so if they need to they could fit four missile tubes in the cell they have been using for individual S-350 missiles up until now.

I agree that the length of the system only being able to carry one S-400 missile (250km or 400km range missiles) or one S-350 (150km or 60km range models) does not really make sense... a corvette on its own wont be able to use a 400km SAM to its max range, but there is little advantage in using a smaller shorter ranged missile as there is no extra benefit.

If the choice was 1 S-400 or 4 S-350 or 16 9M100 per launch tube hatch then that would be something... but it might be a while before 9M100 is available... though being a much shorter missile it might make sense to make a shallow Redut launcher that can only carry 60km range 9M96 and 9M100 missiles but because it is so shallow it can be located all over the place on much smaller ships... like the TOR system shown.

Certainly, for a small ship this makes full sense. With 9M96's ARH it would not even seriously limit the amount of targets simultaneously attacked. Also the newer hypersonic Pantsir missiles will help in that regard by reducing time to target.

Even for larger ships bigger and more powerful AESA radar arrays mounted high on a mast offers much better search performance than anything you might fit to a Kashtan or Panstir mount on the deck... I think it is a good idea and it is the equivalent of a battery using one search radar to collect target information... it prevents multiple radars interfering with each other and allows targets to be coordinated so they can allocate mounts to engage targets perhaps with some overlap for more dangerous targets, but essentially making the mounts cheaper but without reducing the systems ability to engage multiple targets...

Actually it's the opposite. They are making the new missile because they found out they have lot of space in redut cells.

At the begining redut was only for 9m96 family.

Hope for them they will find out that they could quad-pack 9m96 in them also. That would bring the max number on Gorshkov to 128 9m96 and 24 UKSK making it a destroyer of 135m

The Redut system was always intended to be a unified air defence missile system using S-350 and S-400 missiles. It was only on smaller ships like Frigates and Corvettes that they only load S-350 and 9M100 missiles, though now it seems with launching long range calibres they realise a ship does not need to detect a target itself to shoot at it, so there is no reason not to fit 400km range SAMs to a corvette.... though you wouldn't make all its missiles S-400s of course.

This version uses turbine instead of diesel so that's one argument in favor

Which also suggests a requirement for higher speed... the Udaloy and Sovremmeny class destroyers are similar in size but have different propulsion to suit their different roles of anti sub and anti carrier use.

They are building these for a specific role not multi-purpose.

All their ships are multirole to an extent... even if only for self defence in the smaller models.

This comes from the Russian themselves who said they are removing the Launchers to make room for Anti Submarine weaponry.

The new Russian anti sub weaponry comes on the UKSK launchers in the form of the 91ER1.

Helicopter pad and hangar can be removed for more room for weapons.

Most of the time a helicopter pad and hangar are more use than a few extra weapons.

The big karakurt is heavy with more powerfull engines but still a small size which means less space for the crew and less efficiency at sea.

Indeed cramming more missiles and weapons into a small ship just reduces comfort and endurance...

Russia has specific local areas that need to be kept clear of submarines for which they currently use Grisha-class ships that are approaching expiration date, it makes perfect sense to take standard Karakurt, add sonar package, install Paket in the back, load anti-sub missiles in those 8 UKSK cells and make them in bulk for this purpose

And sub hunting is never a solo task... it would be working with friendly SSKs and other platforms and aircraft perhaps using the signals and information from sonar beds on the sea floor to find targets... not every vessel being used needs a sonar...

It is a Corvette essentially with four AESA radars... it should be the best most powerful thing in the world shouldn't it? Very Happy

Not most powerfull. They made a new radar for the ground SM variant and stoped the S2. Logically they should have used the SM radar for the naval variant.

We can deduce that the pantsir S2 isn't meeting their expectation so they made the SM for which they will use the 40km missiles.

That brings the question is it possible to use the 40km missile on the naval pantsir then.

The most recent articles mention 400km range missiles which must be S-400 missiles

It will be a new missile. I don't think S-400 missiles can fit in redut.

Most of the time a helicopter pad and hangar are more use than a few extra weapons.

Yeah but the design of the big karakurt doesn't have it. So I suggested they use a bigger hull for the same weaponery/capabilities. They intend to use it as missike boat rather than a corvette.

Nice closeup of the Odintsovo's Pantsir-M

That will answer the question if the problem is the shipyard or the engine problem.

If another shipyard gets the order for two of these boats then it was the shipyard, but if no one gets a new order for these boats it was the engine...

I think its gotta be the shipyard, especially if they never even started construction.

When is the last time a much delayed project got cancelled?
Only one I can think of is Amur nearly lost their 20380 contract but they got frightened, got their shit together & have pushed out their 2nd pretty quickly, 3rd has come even quicker despite having the new Zaslon mast & now got an extra 6 ships contracted.

Hmm there is suggestion at Balancer that its a ploy to get Vostochnaya to go bankrupt -> get rolled into USC -> production back on.

hoom wrote:Hmm there is suggestion at Balancer that its a ploy to get Vostochnaya to go bankrupt -> get rolled into USC -> production back on.

Doubtful

They haven't started production, not a good thing but not unfixable

But combined with constant shortage of engines and scraping of INF treaty question was asked if these ships are as needed as they once were especially ones from a slow shipyard

I think its gotta be the shipyard, especially if they never even started construction.

If they found they could not get engines they would not have started production until they were sure they could secure some.

I would say if they had not started construction then it would be because of uncertainty about the engines as that would make getting loans and credit almost impossible... who is going to loan you money to make something when something as critical as the propulsion system is not certain yet...

Which company wants to get stuck with a half built ship filling up the slipway waiting for engines... to be designed...

When is the last time a much delayed project got cancelled?

Which suggests the engines they need are not coming... they clearly have to get new engines which likely means a ship redesign...

But combined with constant shortage of engines and scraping of INF treaty question was asked if these ships are as needed as they once were especially ones from a slow shipyard

I always thought having lots of corvettes with land attack cruise missiles was a serious waste of a lot of corvettes... the problem is now solved as the removal of the INF treaty means they can attach wheeled launchers to their Iskander batteries already in service... cheap and quick and easy, and so they can load more useful things into the Corvettes now instead.

How is the order book for that shipyard?

Its reported that the 2* 22800 are half their work for the next 4yrs so its a pretty dire order book.
Not a huge yard though.

I always thought having lots of corvettes with land attack cruise missiles was a serious waste of a lot of corvettes.

They're also corvettes with some scary powerful anti-ship missiles.

Which suggests the engines they need are not coming.

I think the engines will still be coming eventually, just someone else will get the order, probably Amur as long as it keeps pushing ships out reasonably quick.

Yes I'd certainly believe the delay starting is the desire not to have a part built ship waiting on engines but it also leaves them looking like a shipyard in financial trouble thats sat on whatever initial funding for several years without even starting -> Govt may reasonably try to get that $$ back & avoid the risk of it disappearing.