Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Russian Navy: Status and News #5

    PapaDragon
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 9016
    Points : 9098
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Russian Navy: Status and News #5 - Page 8 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status and News #5

    Post  PapaDragon on Sat Feb 22, 2020 10:37 am

    Gremyashy class hit the wall due to imported engines, they will not be building any more of them

    With updated radars only difference between Gremyashy and Stereguchy is UKSK and extra endurance none of which are vital for Pacific because they will be used predominantly for guarding White Sea bastion from hostile subs which neither requires UKSK nor endurance, everything is close by and well within range of coastal aviation and missile batteries

    Rodion_Romanovic
    Rodion_Romanovic

    Posts : 934
    Points : 932
    Join date : 2015-12-30

    Russian Navy: Status and News #5 - Page 8 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status and News #5

    Post  Rodion_Romanovic on Sat Feb 22, 2020 11:02 am

    PapaDragon wrote:Gremyashy class hit the wall due to imported engines, they will not be building any more of them

    With updated radars only difference between Gremyashy and Stereguchy is UKSK and extra endurance none of which are vital for Pacific because they will be used predominantly for guarding White Sea bastion from hostile subs which neither requires UKSK nor endurance, everything is close by and well within range of coastal aviation and missile batteries

    well, the 2 gremyashy (20385) built for the russian navy have been supplied with russian (kolomna) diesel engines (the same one on the base 20380), so I do not see why they could not do the same on new ships, unless there are not some limitations (e.g. lower speed or reliability due to the increased size of the ship 20385 are about 1,5 m longer and 300 tons heavier than 20380 according to public available data)...

    In addition, among these 10 ships maybe a few of them will be the gas turbine powered 20386 (mercury class)
    PapaDragon
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 9016
    Points : 9098
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Russian Navy: Status and News #5 - Page 8 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status and News #5

    Post  PapaDragon on Sat Feb 22, 2020 11:44 am

    Yes there are limitations with Kolomna engines on Gremyashy, those ships were designed around MTU engines and local diesels had to be modified (and compromised in performance) to get them to work otherwise they would have had to ditch two whole ships

    Mercury class uses completely new fully local engine which is not compatible with Gremyashy nor Stereguchy classes
    Rodion_Romanovic
    Rodion_Romanovic

    Posts : 934
    Points : 932
    Join date : 2015-12-30

    Russian Navy: Status and News #5 - Page 8 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status and News #5

    Post  Rodion_Romanovic on Sat Feb 22, 2020 12:03 pm

    PapaDragon wrote:
    Mercury class uses completely new fully local engine which is not compatible with Gremyashy nor Stereguchy classes

    Of course, they are totally different ships...i meant that it is possible that a part of the ten ships will be Mercury class and not 20380
    PapaDragon
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 9016
    Points : 9098
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Russian Navy: Status and News #5 - Page 8 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status and News #5

    Post  PapaDragon on Sat Feb 22, 2020 12:12 pm

    ...i meant that it is possible that a part of the ten ships will be Mercury class and not 20380

    Highly unlikely

    Mercury is brand spanking new design, it's basically a test bed for new systems and propulsion and it still has ways to go before it's certified for serial construction

    Also Pacific shipyards aren't qualified to build something like Mercury yet
    Rodion_Romanovic
    Rodion_Romanovic

    Posts : 934
    Points : 932
    Join date : 2015-12-30

    Russian Navy: Status and News #5 - Page 8 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status and News #5

    Post  Rodion_Romanovic on Sat Feb 22, 2020 12:39 pm

    PapaDragon wrote:
    ...i meant that it is possible that a part of the ten ships will be Mercury class and not 20380

    Highly unlikely

    Mercury is brand spanking new design, it's basically a test bed for new systems and propulsion and it still has ways to go before it's certified for serial construction

    Also Pacific shipyards aren't qualified to build something like Mercury yet

    Why not? What would limit them? Propulsion and weapon system integration work?

    I am not saying they should start today with them, but after the pilot 20386 will have passed the tests and commissioned, and the first serial 20386 will be built (in the west of Russia either still at Severnaya verf, or better at Pella shipyard) possibly with a different armament set or division between base and modular weapons, they could also start building them in the east...


    As an example, according to the size constraints, Amur shipyard should be able to build ship of the size of a large frigate  (around 8000tons max possible displacement and
    Max length 150m) but did not build recently many large surface military ships.

    150 m means that they should be able to build a 22350 (gorshov class frigate), that is 135m long, but not a 22350m Gorshkov M, that should have approximately the same size as the 1155 Udaloy class antisub destroyer.

    Btw last year amur shipyard launched a ferry ship for the
    connection to Sakhalin, probably near the largest possible width for its facilities (the ferry is 131 m long,  20.3 m wide, and with a draft of 6.6 m),


    Last edited by Rodion_Romanovic on Sat Feb 22, 2020 12:45 pm; edited 1 time in total
    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 5294
    Points : 5286
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Russian Navy: Status and News #5 - Page 8 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status and News #5

    Post  Isos on Sat Feb 22, 2020 12:43 pm

    Another 10 for the northern fleet and also 10 for baltic/Black sea/mediteranean would be good to improve numbers. I would even put pantsir instead of the more expensive redut to reduce costs.
    PapaDragon
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 9016
    Points : 9098
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Russian Navy: Status and News #5 - Page 8 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status and News #5

    Post  PapaDragon on Sat Feb 22, 2020 1:17 pm


    Replacing Redut with Pantsir is idiotic

    Redut is fully fledged AA system, Pantsir is point-defence

    If they need Pantsir that badly they can replace AK-630 with it

    avatar
    hoom

    Posts : 2066
    Points : 2056
    Join date : 2016-05-06

    Russian Navy: Status and News #5 - Page 8 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status and News #5

    Post  hoom on Mon Feb 24, 2020 6:59 am

    Replacing Redut with Pantsir is idiotic

    Redut is fully fledged AA system, Pantsir is point-defence

    If they need Pantsir that badly they can replace AK-630 with it
    12* Redut with a radar thats known to be inadequate at even quite short range vs 32* 40km Pantsir with tailored 4-face AESA.

    IMO the Pantsir would be the better defense for a relatively small ship likely to be operating within range of shore aviation.
    But Furke-Redut is probably the cheaper option.
    Big_Gazza
    Big_Gazza

    Posts : 1925
    Points : 1927
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Russian Navy: Status and News #5 - Page 8 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status and News #5

    Post  Big_Gazza on Mon Feb 24, 2020 10:07 am

    I'm amused that you think a Pantsir missile has an effective range of 40kms Very Happy You might be able to lob one on a parabolic arc and cover that distance but you won't hit anything...

    Pantsir is a CIWS. Redut is a full fledged medium range AAM.

    Replace the Furke radar by all means, as the adoption of more powerful radars will give extra capabilities to Redut.
    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 5294
    Points : 5286
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Russian Navy: Status and News #5 - Page 8 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status and News #5

    Post  Isos on Mon Feb 24, 2020 10:25 am

    Big_Gazza wrote:I'm amused that you think a Pantsir missile has an effective range of 40kms Very Happy   You might be able to lob one on a parabolic arc and cover that distance but you won't hit anything...

    Pantsir is a CIWS. Redut is a full fledged medium range AAM.

    Replace the Furke radar by all means, as the adoption of more powerful radars will give extra capabilities to Redut.

    Unless they can use the 150km 9m96, the air defence of this ship will mainly be used against antiship missiles.

    Detection of low flying missile is within 40km range only so a pantsir is enough and allow more missiles than the 12 redut.

    If they can use the 150km 9m96 then keep the redut but if it is limited to the 40km one go for a pantsir because in reality it won't change a lot the capability of the ship but will carry more missiles.
    Rodion_Romanovic
    Rodion_Romanovic

    Posts : 934
    Points : 932
    Join date : 2015-12-30

    Russian Navy: Status and News #5 - Page 8 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status and News #5

    Post  Rodion_Romanovic on Mon Feb 24, 2020 11:38 am

    Isos wrote:
    Big_Gazza wrote:I'm amused that you think a Pantsir missile has an effective range of 40kms Very Happy   You might be able to lob one on a parabolic arc and cover that distance but you won't hit anything...

    Pantsir is a CIWS. Redut is a full fledged medium range AAM.

    Replace the Furke radar by all means, as the adoption of more powerful radars will give extra capabilities to Redut.

    Unless they can use the 150km 9m96, the air defence of this ship will mainly be used against antiship missiles.

    Detection of low flying missile is within 40km range only so a pantsir is enough and allow more missiles than the 12 redut.

    If they can use the 150km 9m96 then keep the redut but if it is limited to the 40km one go for a pantsir because in reality it won't change a lot the capability of the ship but will carry more missiles.

    Does the new mast with Zaslon radar allow the use of 120 km missile?

    The other problem, anyway, is that the number of VLS cells
    Is limited... 12 Redut cells means up to 48 short range 9M100 missiles, but if you mix there also the medium to long range 9M96 the number of missiles carried would be quite low...

    Possibly it could be worth anyway to replace the current (Gun only) CIWS AK-630 with a missile /gun CIWS with Kortik (Kashtan) CIWS, unless they even decide to put the state of the art pantsir...
    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 5294
    Points : 5286
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Russian Navy: Status and News #5 - Page 8 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status and News #5

    Post  Isos on Mon Feb 24, 2020 2:05 pm

    Does the new mast with Zaslon radar allow the use of 120 km missile?

    The other problem, anyway, is that the number of VLS cells
    Is limited... 12 Redut cells means up to 48 short range 9M100 missiles, but if you mix there also the medium to long range 9M96 the number of missiles carried would be quite low...

    Possibly it could be worth anyway to replace the current (Gun only) CIWS AK-630 with a missile /gun CIWS with Kortik (Kashtan) CIWS, unless they even decide to put the state of the art pantsir...

    It could but depend on the target being engaged. The radar shouldn't have issues tracking at 150-200km a patrol aircraft like the P8 or a huge fighter like a f-15.

    12 cells means it can fight any nato ship by its own because thry mostly carry 8 anti ship missiles. If you have as much Steregoushchy as there are enemy ships then they can hardly overwhelm you.

    If there is a carrier in the enemy formation then you need something like a Slava or kirov supported by some Gorshkovs.

    Difference in cost btw ak-630 and pantsir is too huge to allow replacement on every ship.
    avatar
    hoom

    Posts : 2066
    Points : 2056
    Join date : 2016-05-06

    Russian Navy: Status and News #5 - Page 8 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status and News #5

    Post  hoom on Tue Feb 25, 2020 2:10 pm

    I'm amused that you think a Pantsir missile has an effective range of 40kms Very Happy You might be able to lob one on a parabolic arc and cover that distance but you won't hit anything...
    The current 20km range ones have claimed kills out to their designed 20km in Syria.
    https://www.russiadefence.net/t1878p675-pantsir-s1-news-thread#202820
    Based on Syria experience they're doing upgrades to Pantsir-S1M with new 30km range missiles.

    The new generation Pantsir-SM will have new 40km range missiles, same on the naval Pantsir-M -> 40km.

    Honestly it seems kinda crazy for what was supposed to be a point-defense system to be expanded to Medium range capability, would seem more important to focus on improving the sub 15km range capability to me but its not me making the decisions dunno

    Does the new mast with Zaslon radar allow the use of 120 km missile?
    The quoted specs are 1m^2 target at 75km so it should be be able to properly utilise the 60km missile.
    But 120km is not going to be much use unless in some kind of cooperative engagement scenario, maybe somewhat useful vs P-8s?
    avatar
    Mindstorm

    Posts : 945
    Points : 1112
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Russian Navy: Status and News #5 - Page 8 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status and News #5

    Post  Mindstorm on Tue Feb 25, 2020 2:43 pm

    I start by saying that i believe that some of the posts here, this one included, could be moved to "Naval Air Defence systems" thread.


    Anyway in the most basic concept the choice of the main air defense system for low/mid displacement ships (from light corvettes to light frigates) is guided by principally two main operational tasks and obviosly the relative cost of in terms of realization/manteinace/ammo-replenishment  :

    1) Self defense anti-munition role.
    2) Broader area-denial air-defense useable also for ship-group colaborative engagement.

    While for low tonnage ships the choice of an high performance short range self-defense system or very high performance short-to-medium range AD system -such as the Панцирь-М could appear by far the best choice in terms of capitalization of the limited hull's volume, sensor capabilities and cost for unit and single interceptor in countering enemy high-cost antiship missiles we must taking into account that the choice instead of an air defense system of medium to long range with vertical launchers ,active radar homing and ship-group integrated target designation such as Полимент/Редут allow all ship of a group to fully contribute to the defeat of the air attack and/or the dilution of the density of ther delivered anti-ship munitions even if purposely arranged to coming all from one sector to saturate the capability of a single ship of the group.


    Let examine some of the most important technical design choices behind some of the characteristics of the previously named air defense systems:

    Панцирь-М system has been designed (like the Каштан-М before it) with a four interceptor missile for side, instead of the 6 of the ground based systrem ,this apparently odd choice follow instead an anti-saturation concept; in facts the system boast a 32/48 missile under-hull interceptor's storage over the 8 ready to fire that can be authomatically and independently recharged in a group of four for each side, moreover at significantly reduced times in comparison with the old Каштан-М .

    Here some data of the reduced performance export systems.
    http://www.kbptula.ru/ru/razrabotki-kbp/kompleksy-pvo/pantsir-me

    Because the number of contemporaneously engaged targets for each Панцирь-М is  just four the system employ all the four on a side and immediately begin to replace them ,from its 32 missiles under hull storage, while those four interceptors are guided toward theirs targets , in the main time if other targets of a anti-ship missile salvo are present the system employ the four ready missiles on the other side and begin to replace them and so on and on.    

    Anyone can easily understand how  this elegant solution witht he standard two Панцирь-М installations allow the use of 80/112 low-cost interceptors and four 6-barrel rotary 10000 rounds/min capable auto-cannons, with performance characteristics significantly higher than ground based counterpart, to defend a relatively low tonnage ships from terribly high cost missiles such as LRASM or NSM excluding ECM and soft-kill ship mounted defense systems; the efficiency of this system obviously benify greatly from the new hypersonic interceptor with vastly increased range recently introduced, that will "free" the engagement channels of the Панцирь-М in few seconds while downing the targets much farther from the ship.  

    While a pair of Панцирь-М can go a very long way in render almost practically and cost/time of production-wise unrealisable an attack with missiles such as LRASM on a domestic corvette or frigate (just for example the entire year procurement plan of LRASM for the FY 2021 is of 56 missiles at a cost of 224,4 mln dollars o a bit more of 4 mln dollar for single missile !!)

    https://comptroller.defense.gov/Portals/45/Documents/defbudget/fy2021/fy2021_Weapons.pdf

    on the other side it will not provide any kind, of very limited, area defense capability -both for sea and coastal targets- neither the necessary stand-off distance against other more subtle air menaces like jamming aircraft and air-delivered anti-radar missiles that could degrade the single ship or group of ship cababilities to defend themselves while remaining safely outside engagement range if the unique system present would be Панцирь-М.

    The mere presence of some ships with the system Редут mounted would force the jamming aircraft well outside the range where the density of the jamming signal would be capable to effectively interfere with the integrated radar sensors of the ships for not say render suicide a mission foreseeing the employment of relatively low cost planning bombs or very high-cost anti-radiation missiles.
    JohninMK
    JohninMK

    Posts : 7396
    Points : 7475
    Join date : 2015-06-16
    Location : England

    Russian Navy: Status and News #5 - Page 8 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status and News #5

    Post  JohninMK on Tue Feb 25, 2020 6:30 pm

    H I Sutton
    @CovertShores
    ·
    4h
    Interesting. Submarines however, will continue to *increasingly* provide the blue water reach



    The number of Russian large ocean-going warships is to decrease significantly by 2027. This development and the prospects for large naval vessel construction were discussed at the end of 2019, at a special meeting of the Naval High Command, local military media disclosed on 14 February.

    At the end of the State Armaments Programme (GPV) 2018-2027, the aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov and nuclear-powered missile cruiser Admiral Nakhimov should remain in operation.

    The Kirov-class Orlan nuclear-powered cruiser Pyotr Velikiy, flagship of the Northern Fleet, and possibly the Atlant-class missile cruisers Moskva (first of class) and Varyag will undergo refits and upgrades.

    Russia is troubled by delays to both large naval vessel construction and the acceptance of launched naval vessels that remain undergoing trials and are yet to be commissioned. The delays seem more pronounced than in other navies. As elsewhere, construction capacity has become finite. New yards are being built in the Far East. Further construction capacity was acquired with the annexation of Crimea, but mostly for smaller vessels.

    Orders are on the books for the construction of additional Yasen-M nuclear-powered cruise missile submarines and Lada-class diesel-electric submarines. According to sources cited by Flot.com on 14 February, by 2027, the Russian Navy should receive at least six of the latest Project 22350 Admiral Gorshkov-class frigates and probably at least one of the modified Project 22350M series frigates currently under construction.

    Naval amphibious forces will be supplemented by two improved Ivan Gren-class landing ships. They should also be joined by two Universal Landing Ships to be laid down by the Zaliv shipyard in Crimea in May 2020.


    https://www.janes.com/article/94464/russian-navy-ocean-going-warship-numbers-to-be-radically-reduced?socialmedia=twitter
    JohninMK
    JohninMK

    Posts : 7396
    Points : 7475
    Join date : 2015-06-16
    Location : England

    Russian Navy: Status and News #5 - Page 8 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status and News #5

    Post  JohninMK on Tue Feb 25, 2020 6:33 pm

    This guy is obviously a politician.

    Jack Detsch
    @JackDetsch_ALM

    Supreme NATO allied commander Gen. Tod Wolters admits that the Pentagon doesn't have full visibility of Russian submarine deployments in the Atlantic Ocean: "We do, but not for 100% of the time."
    Rodion_Romanovic
    Rodion_Romanovic

    Posts : 934
    Points : 932
    Join date : 2015-12-30

    Russian Navy: Status and News #5 - Page 8 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status and News #5

    Post  Rodion_Romanovic on Tue Feb 25, 2020 8:06 pm

    JohninMK wrote:H I Sutton
    @CovertShores
    ·
    4h
    Interesting. Submarines however, will continue to *increasingly* provide the blue water reach



    The number of Russian large ocean-going warships is to decrease significantly by 2027. This development and the prospects for large naval vessel construction were discussed at the end of 2019, at a special meeting of the Naval High Command, local military media disclosed on 14 February.

    At the end of the State Armaments Programme (GPV) 2018-2027, the aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov and nuclear-powered missile cruiser Admiral Nakhimov should remain in operation.

    The Kirov-class Orlan nuclear-powered cruiser Pyotr Velikiy, flagship of the Northern Fleet, and possibly the Atlant-class missile cruisers Moskva (first of class) and Varyag will undergo refits and upgrades.

    Russia is troubled by delays to both large naval vessel construction and the acceptance of launched naval vessels that remain undergoing trials and are yet to be commissioned. The delays seem more pronounced than in other navies. As elsewhere, construction capacity has become finite. New yards are being built in the Far East. Further construction capacity was acquired with the annexation of Crimea, but mostly for smaller vessels.

    Orders are on the books for the construction of additional Yasen-M nuclear-powered cruise missile submarines and Lada-class diesel-electric submarines. According to sources cited by Flot.com on 14 February, by 2027, the Russian Navy should receive at least six of the latest Project 22350 Admiral Gorshkov-class frigates and probably at least one of the modified Project 22350M series frigates currently under construction.

    Naval amphibious forces will be supplemented by two improved Ivan Gren-class landing ships. They should also be joined by two Universal Landing Ships to be laid down by the Zaliv shipyard in Crimea in May 2020.


    https://www.janes.com/article/94464/russian-navy-ocean-going-warship-numbers-to-be-radically-reduced?socialmedia=twitter
    I do not believe the situation for blue sea ships wi be really worse than the current. Sovremenny class destroyers practically do not exists anymore in the fleet, and there are only 2 slava class cruiser active (even if they plan to do a basic overhaul operation on Moskva, to keep her alive until 2030.

    But yeah, finally they are buidling new ships capable of operating far from home.

    even if it is not a destroyer, and more limited in endurance, admiral Gorshkov frigate went in a nice tour around the world last year. Such ships can be a good replacement in capabilty if not in Size for the soviet era Destroyers.

    And Gorshkov M probably can replace even Slava class cruisers...we just need to see when they can actually start building them...

    By 2027 we can expect at least 8 22350 frigates and maybe one or two 22350M. In addition they are overhauling and modernizing the udaloys. Those should survive until 2032 at least.

    As we wrote before, they just need to start building blue sea vessels in more than one shipyard.

    PapaDragon
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 9016
    Points : 9098
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Russian Navy: Status and News #5 - Page 8 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status and News #5

    Post  PapaDragon on Tue Feb 25, 2020 9:42 pm

    JohninMK wrote:This guy is obviously a politician.

    Jack Detsch
    @JackDetsch_ALM

    Supreme NATO allied commander Gen. Tod Wolters admits that the Pentagon doesn't have full visibility of Russian submarine deployments in the Atlantic Ocean: "We do, but not for 100% of the time."

    Congratulations Mr. Politician-Man, you just discovered purpose of submarines lol1


    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 24501
    Points : 25043
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russian Navy: Status and News #5 - Page 8 Empty temporary air defence navy thread

    Post  GarryB on Wed Feb 26, 2020 3:00 am

    Honestly it seems kinda crazy for what was supposed to be a point-defense system to be expanded to Medium range capability, would seem more important to focus on improving the sub 15km range capability to me but its not me making the decisions

    The tubes they use for the missiles and the two stage missile design means there is plenty of potential to extend the range, so making longer ranged missiles means you can start engaging enemy threats earlier in the engagement making the system rather harder to overwhelm, and in fact capable of engaging some launch platforms as well as just the munitions they are launching. They are also improving their sub 15km capacity with the quad missiles in each missile tube which fairly efficiently improves close in engagement performance and capacity to take on large numbers of threats at one time.

    TOR is being improved to engage 32km range targets too so I suspect there is a clear requirement to engage out to serious distances with these systems.

    It is also important to bear in mind that Pantsir and TOR use command guided missiles which means DIRCMs are totally ineffective as are flares and chaff... most targets have no defence from such missiles and that includes F-35s...

    I start by saying that i believe that some of the posts here, this one included, could be moved to "Naval Air Defence systems" thread.

    Will do.

    OK after looking at the posts I decided to remove the comparison Russian/US/Chinese navy thread and leave the air defence related thread as I think comparing navies is a separate topic from a thread about the Russian navy development and news, while the intricacies air defence missile types is directly related to Russian Navy development and news, so this thread keeps the discussion on Pantsirs vs S-350 and loses the discussion about who has the biggest dick... Russia, US or China....

    The latter has been moved to here



    Last edited by GarryB on Wed Feb 26, 2020 4:10 am; edited 1 time in total
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 24501
    Points : 25043
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russian Navy: Status and News #5 - Page 8 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status and News #5

    Post  GarryB on Wed Feb 26, 2020 4:04 am

    Regarding the Redut launchers the ones fitted to the corvettes and frigates so far have enormous tube liners when loaded with 9M96 missiles.

    It is the equivalent of taking an S-400 four tube launcher on the back of a truck and replacing one large full size S-400 missile (like the 250km or 400km range models) with a single launch tube for a 9M96 (the 40km or 140km range models).

    Now it is possible that these missiles are special and need lots of wiring and space around them to work but that makes me wonder why the 9M96 launch tubes fitted to S-400 launchers can be loaded four tubes in the space of one of the larger missiles.

    If that can be used on Redut that means four missiles per hatch so we are talking about 48 missiles per launcher for the 140km and 40km range 9M96 missile types, plus the capacity for 192 missiles of the much smaller 9M100 which fit four missiles per 9M96 missile, or 12 x 4 x 4 = 192 missiles.

    The combination of 140km range missiles and 40km range missiles would deal with aircraft... target information could come from other platforms including UAV carried by the ship itself as these missiles are ARH and could engage targets outside the direct line of sight of ship based sensors. The 10-15km range lock on after launch 9M100 missiles with a datalink back to the launch platform should be rather realistic because they are basically talking about the same guidance with the Hermes 100km range air to surface missile... a thermal EO seeker with a datalink back to the launch platform and very high speed etc etc...

    Of course having said that Pantsir is an excellent system and could be loaded with those quad missiles for hitting small drone targets in swarms and the missiles themselves are command guided so they are incredibly cheap... you could carry a shipping crate on the deck with extra missiles for them if you need them... there is potential for a HMG mount with SOSNA missiles mounted too as a cheap simple line of sight very high speed missile that could be hand loaded at about 35kgs each in their tubes...
    avatar
    hoom

    Posts : 2066
    Points : 2056
    Join date : 2016-05-06

    Russian Navy: Status and News #5 - Page 8 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status and News #5

    Post  hoom on Wed Feb 26, 2020 7:47 am

    TOR is being improved to engage 32km range targets
    Oh I missed that, wow.

    If they can get the 12* Redut into doing quad-pack properly then Zaslon-Redut would be serious kit for a ~2000ton light frigate.
    avatar
    Arrow

    Posts : 586
    Points : 586
    Join date : 2012-02-12

    Russian Navy: Status and News #5 - Page 8 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status and News #5

    Post  Arrow on Wed Feb 26, 2020 8:55 am

    https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/7825235
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 24501
    Points : 25043
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russian Navy: Status and News #5 - Page 8 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status and News #5

    Post  GarryB on Wed Feb 26, 2020 9:18 am

    vital for Pacific because they will be used predominantly for guarding White Sea bastion from hostile subs which neither requires UKSK nor endurance,

    Actually the UKSK launch tubes can hold 91RE1 anti sub ballistic rockets to engage enemy subs 40-50km away in a minute or two, and could also be loaded with anti ship missiles in case the enemy decides to send some surface ships too...

    UKSK launchers just make the ship more flexible and are the way forward for Russian ships in the future.

    Oh I missed that, wow.

    It was in the Combat Approved video on Youtube on the programme about the TOR system.


    As reported previously TASS sources in the shipbuilding industry, the tonnage of new ships for the Russian Navy class will be 25 thousand tons, the maximum length is about 220 m. a Single Russian UDC will carry on Board more than 20 heavy helicopters, get the camera dock for landing craft and can carry up to 900 Marines.

    Nice...
    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 5294
    Points : 5286
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Russian Navy: Status and News #5 - Page 8 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status and News #5

    Post  Isos on Wed Feb 26, 2020 10:17 am

    Actually the UKSK launch tubes can hold 91RE1 anti sub ballistic rockets to engage enemy subs 40-50km away in a minute or two, and could also be loaded with anti ship missiles in case the enemy decides to send some surface ships too...

    UKSK launchers just make the ship more flexible and are the way forward for Russian ships in the future.

    Actually for shore protection they can have land based ka-27 in great numbers for attacking subs. But I agree UKSK is a real power booster for any ship.

    Sponsored content

    Russian Navy: Status and News #5 - Page 8 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status and News #5

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Wed Jun 03, 2020 11:23 am