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


+72
marcellogo
Azi
auslander
miroslav
thegopnik
Finty
Mir
mavaff
Russian_Patriot_
Lurk83
Kiko
nero
flamming_python
PapaDragon
The_Observer
RTN
gbu48098
thedrunkengeneral
Firebird
ARYGER
zardof
limb
bren_tann
lyle6
slasher
mnztr
The-thing-next-door
Backman
calripson
AMCXXL
Big_Gazza
kvs
Sujoy
lancelot
Gomig-21
Tingsay
LMFS
medo
owais.usmani
TheArmenian
ultimatewarrior
Arrow
Mindstorm
franco
d_taddei2
Viktor
walle83
PhSt
Tsavo Lion
magnumcromagnon
Gibraltar
Singular_Transform
x_54_u43
marat
JohninMK
Cyberspec
GunshipDemocracy
Regular
miketheterrible
George1
ult
hoom
Vann7
Slevin
SeigSoloyvov
dino00
Rodion_Romanovic
MiamiMachineShop
Hole
verkhoturye51
Admin
GarryB
76 posters

    Russian Navy: Status and News #5

    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 38475
    Points : 38975
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russian Navy: Status and News #5 Empty Russian Navy: Status and News #5

    Post  GarryB Wed May 01, 2019 3:05 pm

    Well when they haven't made much of anything for some time making corvettes will allow them to get their skill set up... the larger vessels use much the same elements but in larger numbers and the main sensors and propulsion is scaled up... which is not to say the transition from working on smaller ships to bigger ships will be easy, it should be achievable, and once the process is started it should get much faster pretty quickly.

    Ironically it is the really big boats with nuclear propulsion that should be easier as that is an area they don't have a lot of problems regarding AFAIK...
    Rodion_Romanovic
    Rodion_Romanovic


    Posts : 2352
    Points : 2519
    Join date : 2015-12-30
    Location : Merkelland

    Russian Navy: Status and News #5 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status and News #5

    Post  Rodion_Romanovic Wed May 01, 2019 5:02 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    Ironically it is the really big boats with nuclear propulsion that should be easier as that is an area they don't have a lot of problems regarding AFAIK...
    Well, the Kirov battlecruisers were all built at the Baltic shipyard in Saint Petersburg, the same shipyard that is building the large nuclear Icebreakers.

    I do not know if the plan is to build the new nuclear powered destroyers there or in Severnaya Verf (that should already have its hands full with Gorshkov class, gorshkov M and with the plans for the Priboy amphibious ship).

    Another place that could build them is Zvezda, that has also already an order for the huge nuclear icebreaker lider class.
    Isos
    Isos


    Posts : 11233
    Points : 11203
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Russian Navy: Status and News #5 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status and News #5

    Post  Isos Wed May 01, 2019 6:33 pm

    USSR with its huge resources managed to produce only 4 kirov. When they saw how costly they were they started Slavas.

    Hope for them they won't make the same mistake. If they want arsenal ships with hundreds of VLS go for sub. They don't need helicopters and air def systems.

    Anything more than 200m is waste of time.
    Admin
    Admin


    Posts : 2926
    Points : 3798
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Russian Navy: Status and News #5 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status and News #5

    Post  Admin Wed May 01, 2019 9:19 pm

    Isos wrote:USSR with its huge resources managed to produce only 4 kirov. When they saw how costly they were they started Slavas.

    Hope for them they won't make the same mistake. If they want arsenal ships with hundreds of VLS go for sub. They don't need helicopters and air def systems.

    Anything more than 200m is waste of time.

    One only has to look at where the modernisation efforts are going to know the priority.  It is not to Slava cruisers. With the 3S14 universal VLS the Admiral Nakhimov will be the most powerful vessel in the fleet.  The Slavas just get an engine cleaning and a new coat of paint.  It is Peter the Great that goes on six month deployments all over the world.  
    verkhoturye51
    verkhoturye51


    Posts : 438
    Points : 430
    Join date : 2018-03-02

    Russian Navy: Status and News #5 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status and News #5

    Post  verkhoturye51 Wed May 01, 2019 9:27 pm

    Decision for 19k ton Lider over 14k ton one also indicates this.
    Hole
    Hole


    Posts : 10344
    Points : 10324
    Join date : 2018-03-24
    Age : 47
    Location : Scholzistan

    Russian Navy: Status and News #5 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status and News #5

    Post  Hole Wed May 01, 2019 9:47 pm

    Isos wrote:USSR with its huge resources managed to produce only 4 kirov. When they saw how costly they were they started Slavas.

    Hope for them they won't make the same mistake. If they want arsenal ships with hundreds of VLS go for sub. They don't need helicopters and air def systems.

    Anything more than 200m is waste of time.

    Slavas were built at the same time as the Kirovs.
    Isos
    Isos


    Posts : 11233
    Points : 11203
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Russian Navy: Status and News #5 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status and News #5

    Post  Isos Wed May 01, 2019 10:14 pm

    Why did they build Slavas then ? Kirov is much better.

    One only has to look at where the modernisation efforts are going to know the priority.  It is not to Slava cruisers. With the 3S14 universal VLS the Admiral Nakhimov will be the most powerful vessel in the fleet.  The Slavas just get an engine cleaning and a new coat of paint.  It is Peter the Great that goes on six month deployments all over the world.  

    I'm not talking about capicities of the ship but capacities to get new ships.

    You also need to look how your new ships are financed. There are always delays because they can't give the money at time. And most of the time it is more expensive than they think.

    Nakhimov needs 10 years for an upgrade and it was a new and unused ship. PtG will need even more.

    Decision for 19k ton Lider over 14k ton one also indicates this

    As long as they don't start building them, it's only words and drawings.
    verkhoturye51
    verkhoturye51


    Posts : 438
    Points : 430
    Join date : 2018-03-02

    Russian Navy: Status and News #5 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status and News #5

    Post  verkhoturye51 Wed May 01, 2019 10:42 pm

    As long as they don't start building them, it's only words and drawings.

    Putin has repeatedly stated that Russia needs a blue water navy, most recently in his annual nation address in February. For Liders, time schedule was given. Construction has to start in early 2020s with commissioning in the late 2020s. Next stage is technical design. Deputy Navy commander Bursuk said that it will begin in 2019-2020 and will be finished by 2022. Every normal person would expect delays and timelines shifted right, but the project is overall progressing.
    MiamiMachineShop
    MiamiMachineShop


    Posts : 111
    Points : 115
    Join date : 2019-04-09

    Russian Navy: Status and News #5 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status and News #5

    Post  MiamiMachineShop Wed May 01, 2019 10:54 pm

    Isn't the replacement of Sov/Udaloy a bigger priority now? The replacement of such ships is bigger priority right now. Out of 15 Udaloys that served Soviets, 9 remain and will be upgraded to modern level (potentially). This leaves 6 ships to be filled with Gorshkov-m. Of the Sovremmeny there were 17 of this class active. Virtually none are left of them. Means they need roughly 17 Gorshkov type ships to replace these guys. So roughly about 20-25 ships need replacing, with 9 upgraded Udaloys.

    There were 40 Krivak built which also need to be replaced by Grigorivich/Gorshkov.

    As you can see 20+40=60 ships that will need to be replaced of decent tonnage. 7 Arsenal ships can be made later after this priority is met. Meantime having 2 Kirov and 2 Slava and 1 carrier is not bad until Lider + Shtorm comes online.

    11356 played bigger role in Syria than Slava, who liquidated the C-2 of enemy? Who provided near shore security?  24 x 3S90M1 also provided additional AD to Slava S-300. Just 2 of these guys made a huge difference, having 20-30 is another realm. Also 8 oniks is not less deadly than the  Bazalt/vulcan. 2 11356 carrying 16 oniks is more dangerous than one slava with 20 bazalts/vulcans so the priority for MOD and from what they are doing seems to be focusing on Gorshkov and Gorshkov-M. They will also contribute to blue water ability.

    As for Lider, I would say even next SAP is possible. How many Liders will they actually build? 2 Kirovs basically need to be replaced and Slava they made 3. So basically 7 Liders. 60 Gorshkov > 7 Lider right now. Especially since they will have Ustinov, Varyag, Nakhimov, and Peter Velikiy
    Isos
    Isos


    Posts : 11233
    Points : 11203
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Russian Navy: Status and News #5 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status and News #5

    Post  Isos Wed May 01, 2019 11:11 pm

    The thing is that they are not replacing 1 old for 1 new.

    Sov were meant to be replace by gorshkov but now it seems Liders will replace them.

    Grigorovitch were bought because Gorshkov were not coming as quickly as they wanted. But it is a pretty good ship that even indian orders in big numbers.

    In terms of number, they wants 30 Gorshkovs and 12 Liders.

    But now they have Gorshkov-M in their plans which no one knows what it will be.


    Putin has repeatedly stated that Russia needs a blue water navy, most recently in his annual nation address in February. For Liders, time schedule was given. Construction has to start in early 2020s with commissioning in the late 2020s. Next stage is technical design. Deputy Navy commander Bursuk said that it will begin in 2019-2020 and will be finished by 2022. Every normal person would expect delays and timelines shifted right, but the project is overall progressing.

    Russians and timelines never agree unfortunatly. Most of the time there is like 7 or 8 years of delays.
    Rodion_Romanovic
    Rodion_Romanovic


    Posts : 2352
    Points : 2519
    Join date : 2015-12-30
    Location : Merkelland

    Russian Navy: Status and News #5 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status and News #5

    Post  Rodion_Romanovic Wed May 01, 2019 11:15 pm

    Isos wrote:USSR with its huge resources managed to produce only 4 kirov. When they saw how costly they were they started Slavas.

    Hope for them they won't make the same mistake. If they want arsenal ships with hundreds of VLS go for sub. They don't need helicopters and air def systems.


    The scope of a sub is to travel undetected, while a capital ship like a carrier or a battle cruiser have to show that is the biggest and the meaniest in the area. Also for port visits to foreign countries a sub is not the ideal ship.
    And finally (but one of the more important points) I believe the more important characteristic of both Slavas and Kirovs is their multilayered air defence system. Air defence for a large area, protecting the rest of the fleet is not something that a Ohio class submarine, converted in cruise missile carrier, can provide.
    Rodion_Romanovic
    Rodion_Romanovic


    Posts : 2352
    Points : 2519
    Join date : 2015-12-30
    Location : Merkelland

    Russian Navy: Status and News #5 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status and News #5

    Post  Rodion_Romanovic Wed May 01, 2019 11:44 pm

    Isos wrote:The thing is that they are not replacing 1 old for 1 new.

    Sov were meant to be replace by gorshkov but now it seems Liders will replace them.

    Grigorovitch were bought because Gorshkov were not coming as quickly as they wanted. But it is a pretty good ship that even indian orders in big numbers.

    In terms of number, they wants 30 Gorshkovs and 12 Liders.

    But now they have Gorshkov-M in their plans which no one knows what it will be.


    Putin has repeatedly stated that Russia needs a blue water navy, most recently in his annual nation address in February. For Liders, time schedule was given. Construction has to start in early 2020s with commissioning in the late 2020s. Next stage is technical design. Deputy Navy commander Bursuk said that it will begin in 2019-2020 and will be finished by 2022. Every normal person would expect delays and timelines shifted right, but the project is overall progressing.

    Russians and timelines never agree unfortunatly. Most of the time there is like 7 or 8 years of delays.
    they need capital ships (leader class cruiser/destroyers) and they need also other blue water ships. Those latter could be a mix of destroyers and or frigates. The navy apparently is very happy of the first Gorshkov class frigate, so I can imagine that they will want to build at the same time both Gorshkov and Gorshkov-M. In addition the frigates and light destroyers will be build in different shipyards than those that will build the Leader class battlecruisers. The problem could only be on the availability of proper funding for the projects, but apparently there is.support from the president.

    Furthermore, the difference to the soviet times is that all kind of ships will get a similar armament (slava, kirovs and sovs had all.different.weapons instead) the difference will be instead the quantity of the VLS cells.
    verkhoturye51
    verkhoturye51


    Posts : 438
    Points : 430
    Join date : 2018-03-02

    Russian Navy: Status and News #5 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status and News #5

    Post  verkhoturye51 Wed May 01, 2019 11:59 pm

    Isn't the replacement of Sov/Udaloy a bigger priority now?

    There are many priority projects in the Russian navy. Improved Gorshkov class is currently in the technical design phase, with the laying down of the first ship scheduled for 2020 as per Northern Design Bureau.

    Russians and timelines never agree unfortunatly. Most of the time there is like 7 or 8 years of delays.

    Don't exaggerate. This happened with Gorshkov and Gren. Those projects were complex and faced big financial and supply issues. Now all of this is over. Russia is producing domestic diesel engines and other equipment. Besides, Lider is to have a nuclear power plant. So there is no reason for any significant delays from now on.
    Hole
    Hole


    Posts : 10344
    Points : 10324
    Join date : 2018-03-24
    Age : 47
    Location : Scholzistan

    Russian Navy: Status and News #5 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status and News #5

    Post  Hole Thu May 02, 2019 10:34 am

    Belt and braces.

    Kirov was large, nuclear powered and fitted with new electronics and weapons.

    Slava was based on the Kresta II class, slightly enlarged, with some new and some old equipment as backup for the Kirovs if they run into some development problems.
    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 38475
    Points : 38975
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russian Navy: Status and News #5 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status and News #5

    Post  GarryB Thu May 02, 2019 1:06 pm

    The Kirov was a very ambitious class of ship... they are the biggest non carrier military ship even today, they didn't have custom designed nuclear reactors to propel them so they went for a complicated combined propulsion system... it was also the first navy ship to use vertical launch missiles... there was lots that was brand new and risky and it was being built at a time when the money was spread very thin, so as a precaution they also built what the west called the Krasina class, which was later called the Slava class when the name of the first vessel was revealed... it had a much reduced weapon load because its conventional power plant was not the same and not as powerful.

    It had Rif and Klinok vertical launch SAMs but otherwise it was much smaller and lighter and while heavily armed with 16 Vulkan supersonic anti ship missiles, it didn't really have the same presence that the Kirov did with its enormous size but strangely for a Soviet vessel decks that appeared empty with no missile tubes or arm launchers.

    The Kirovs were the new powerful ships that would support carriers, and the Slavas were a backup cheaper safer option.

    With new and much more powerful nuclear reactors a Kirov of today could be a much more powerful vessel... it just really depends on how much they want to spend.... but even just taking out the Granits and Rifs and replacing them with UKSK launchers and Redut launchers (note even the 9M96 50km and 150km range missiles would be a huge improvement over the 90km range Rif, let alone a 200km range S-300 variant or 400km range S-400 variant), plus replacing Kashtan-M with Pantsir, and of course the old TOR with the new TOR with twice as many missiles fitting in to the same space... so 192 missiles replaced with 384 missiles, with their range extended from 12km to about 20km and much better accuracy... and you could probably replace the 130mm gun mount on the rear for a 152mm gun mount they developed with the Army in the Coalition programme.

    These changes are not ground breaking and offer a chance to get new systems into service so they can be tested with other systems and the bugs can be worked out... and of course major radar and sensors elements and ESM equipment upgraded... these ships were command centres and battle management vessels so there will be an enormous volume and mass of old electrionics that can be taken out and replaced with much more modern and more powerful and capable electronics that will probably be cheaper and more energy efficient and lighter and will take up a fraction of the space the old stuff took up.

    It would actually be an interesting job just looking at the original components and systems of the Kirov and the new replacement systems and components and working out the best way to upgrade them.

    Just as an example you could take a computer from the 1970s... a Spectrum ZX81, and pretty much replace the insides with a tablet computer and make it a touchscreen portable system that is battery powered. With a mini computer... the size of a small room you could use modern components and make a rack mount system that is easy to maintain and manage and vastly more powerful and capable and perhaps a fraction of the size... what do you do with the extra room?

    Well there are probably other things nearby that could be expanded and use the extra room... ie more 152mm shell storage for example, or more fresh water stores or food stores, or a LAN games room for the crew to relax... a bit of counterstrike.
    Isos
    Isos


    Posts : 11233
    Points : 11203
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Russian Navy: Status and News #5 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status and News #5

    Post  Isos Thu May 02, 2019 2:05 pm

    launchers and Redut launchers (note even the 9M96 50km and 150km range missiles would be a huge improvement over the 90km range Rif, let alone a 200km range S-300 variant or 400km range S-400 variant),

    Half of PtG S-300 are Rif the other half are rif-M which is naval PMU2 standard and uses 48N6E2 missiles with 250km range. You can see that the front radar is the one from ground s-300 (rif-M) and the one in the back is a big round radar for rif that you can also see on slavas.

    Gorshkov could have had the rif-M too just like chinese frigate that have it. The VLS just like Redut launcher is not universal so that change nothing apart missile types being carried.
    Rodion_Romanovic
    Rodion_Romanovic


    Posts : 2352
    Points : 2519
    Join date : 2015-12-30
    Location : Merkelland

    Russian Navy: Status and News #5 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status and News #5

    Post  Rodion_Romanovic Thu May 02, 2019 3:28 pm

    Isos wrote:
    launchers and Redut launchers (note even the 9M96 50km and 150km range missiles would be a huge improvement over the 90km range Rif, let alone a 200km range S-300 variant or 400km range S-400 variant),

    Half of PtG S-300 are Rif the other half are rif-M which is naval PMU2 standard and uses 48N6E2 missiles with 250km range. You can see that the front radar is the one from ground s-300 (rif-M) and the one in the back is a big round radar for rif that you can also see on slavas.

    Gorshkov could have had the rif-M too just like chinese frigate that have it. The VLS just like Redut launcher is not universal so that change nothing apart missile types being carried.

    They are planning to uniform the launchers in the future, so maybe the upgraded PTG could have 176 UKSK-M instead of 80 UKSK +48 Fort + 48 Fort-M as in Nakhimov (80 UKSK as replacement for the 20 Granit cells).

    The S400 missiles should be not too different.in size from onyx anyway...

    As discussed before, instead the redut cells in Gorshkov class are not optimized for the missile size, so they maybe plan to substitute them anyway.

    From what I was able to.find online the longer range (120km) S350 missiles (9M96E2) have a diameter of 240mm, against a 519 mm diameter of.the 48N6 S400 missile, the about 430mm diameter of the kalibr and the about 700mm diameter of.the onyx.

    The redut VLS cell is however not that small compared with the UKSK from what we can see in gorshkov. As Garry already posted, 4 quad packed 9m96E2 could fit inside a UKSK-m.

    The only "waste" could be in vertical space (as the shorter range.missile are also shorter), unless they decide to have some of the VLS launcher shorter (as it is the case for the french VLS, that exists in different lenghts but with the same horizontal area), maybe be able to install them in other part if the ships with less vertical space available.

    and/or they could maybe develop smaller redut VLS, optimized for the size of their missiles.
    Isos
    Isos


    Posts : 11233
    Points : 11203
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Russian Navy: Status and News #5 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status and News #5

    Post  Isos Thu May 02, 2019 4:08 pm

    The only "waste" could be in vertical space (as the shorter range.missile are also shorter), unless they decide to have some of the VLS launcher shorter (as it is the case for the french VLS, that exists in different lenghts but with the same horizontal area), maybe be able to install them in other part if the ships with less vertical space available

    Just keep the redut then . Because a universal VLS that is too short for most of missiles is no longer universal.

    Rodion_Romanovic
    Rodion_Romanovic


    Posts : 2352
    Points : 2519
    Join date : 2015-12-30
    Location : Merkelland

    Russian Navy: Status and News #5 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status and News #5

    Post  Rodion_Romanovic Thu May 02, 2019 5:13 pm

    Isos wrote:
    The only "waste" could be in vertical space (as the shorter range.missile are also shorter), unless they decide to have some of the VLS launcher shorter (as it is the case for the french VLS, that exists in different lenghts but with the same horizontal area), maybe be able to install them in other part if the ships with less vertical space available

    Just keep the redut then . Because a universal VLS that is too short for most of missiles is no longer universal.


    Then, as i was saying, they could redesign the redut to a smaller diameter, as the cell is much bigger than the missile inside it, and the "horizontal" space in the ship is not well used.

    Unless these launchers are instead optimized for the size of the quad packed shorter range s350 missile, that are 125 mm in diameter (vs 240mm).
    MiamiMachineShop
    MiamiMachineShop


    Posts : 111
    Points : 115
    Join date : 2019-04-09

    Russian Navy: Status and News #5 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status and News #5

    Post  MiamiMachineShop Thu May 02, 2019 5:44 pm

    Do we have any recent news on the MGT production of M90FR, M70FRU, and M70FRU-2? It seems to me the only thing stopping production is that they have not reached excess efficiency of the 10-15% stated by UEC. What is limiting them from achieving efficiency? Zorya Mashproekt states that they use cobalt alloys and other additives to manufacture their axial blades which have high thermal efficiency and can tolerate combustion chamber temperature reaching 1165 degrees without warping effects that can degrade engine performance. This temperature allows for High revving 5200RPM performance, and optimal fuel system pressurization allowing low revving performance around 3300RPM without having to power on smaller cruise turbines or cruise diesels. If the only thing NPO is aiming for is increased efficiency, I doubt the problem is their materials science as far as producing axial blades. I know they have advanced materials science and I doubt additives or cobalt alloy production is a limiting factor, neither is precision equipment necessary to mill and machine said components as they have a variety of extruding machines, 5-axis and 7-axis mills, precision laser cutters, and all the other toys. Could it be that fuel system is a very nuanced and tedious system? Those small diameter inlets are withstanding high external temperatures as well as high internal fuel temp and high pressure flow. Could NPO Saturn have problems with ensuring adequate pressurization of fuel system? They could have the engine 90% ready but without adequate fuel system they will not reach desired efficiency. Fuel inlets are not the same as blades, they have to be welded together, when you see the turbine you can see the variety of inlets and hoses running across distributing fuel to achieve optimal atomization and combustion.

    I know Agregat DKVP is for M70FRU-2 and has a stated superior efficiency of 0.4% over Zorya Mashproekt DP-71. If NPO Saturn is producing results similar to UGT16000 and UGT15000, why not just put out the engines they have and work on increased efficiency as they ramp up production? Why is it necessary to begin production with the already stated 15%+ efficiency rating?

    Gearboxes are nowhere near as complicated as engines, casting technology and machining tech aside, gearboxes do not heat up to engine levels, or withstand high pressurization, from what I understand gearboxes are designed with optimal tolerances of ring and pinion as well as high tolerance clutch packs and gear sets. Spec is set for optimal gear speed without creating positive or negative backlash on gear teeth which prematurely wear out gear teeth. Also gear oil lubricants and the flow of lubricants within the cast housing is also important, as during gear operation the oil must spin optimally within the housing to allow for good lubrication. This is nothing compared to maintaining high engine core temperature or fuel pressure. There is know how that goes into it but if they are as far along on M90FR as they say, then gearboxes are nothing for their machining guys.
    Hole
    Hole


    Posts : 10344
    Points : 10324
    Join date : 2018-03-24
    Age : 47
    Location : Scholzistan

    Russian Navy: Status and News #5 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status and News #5

    Post  Hole Thu May 02, 2019 9:59 pm

    There is a video somewhere here in the naval section, which was posted a few days ago, that showed that they are developing a version of the 40N6 missile for the Redut = 400km range.
    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 38475
    Points : 38975
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russian Navy: Status and News #5 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status and News #5

    Post  GarryB Fri May 03, 2019 1:55 am

    Half of PtG S-300 are Rif the other half are rif-M which is naval PMU2 standard and uses 48N6E2 missiles with 250km range. You can see that the front radar is the one from ground s-300 (rif-M) and the one in the back is a big round radar for rif that you can also see on slavas.

    Gorshkov could have had the rif-M too just like chinese frigate that have it. The VLS just like Redut launcher is not universal so that change nothing apart missile types being carried.

    The radars it is fitted with don't indicate the actual missiles being carried... the vessel might have the new radar for the upgraded missile, but how many new missiles have they actually paid for and how many are even carried at sea?

    As discussed before, instead the redut cells in Gorshkov class are not optimized for the missile size, so they maybe plan to substitute them anyway.

    I would not read too much in to the size of the cells for the tests... they might have had telemetry equipment in each tube with the missile to measure all sorts of things and contain cameras or other instruments to monitor conditions for the missile during storage and launch and after launch... the operational system would probably have four missiles per missile hatch.

    The only "waste" could be in vertical space (as the shorter range.missile are also shorter), unless they decide to have some of the VLS launcher shorter (as it is the case for the french VLS, that exists in different lenghts but with the same horizontal area), maybe be able to install them in other part if the ships with less vertical space available.

    and/or they could maybe develop smaller redut VLS, optimized for the size of their missiles.

    Or they could stack the shorter missiles. So in a missile tube big enough to take an S-400 full size missile you should be able to fit four 9M96 missiles, and it is mentioned on another thread that they can fit four 9M100 missiles in each 9M96 tube, so you should be able to get 4x4 9M100 missiles in each S-400 tube so that is 16 missiles, but in terms of length there is a lot of wasted space as you point out... the 150km 9M96 is twice as long as the 50km range 9M96 so perhaps two layers of the 150km missile meaning 8 missiles per tube and perhaps three layers of the smaller 50km range 9M96 missile so 12 missiles per S-400 tube, and the 9M100 might be only slightly shorter than the 50km range missile so perhaps four layers of missiles.... which would be 64 missiles per S-400 tube.

    So with a total of 8 tubes, one UKSK-M launcher might have two S-500s which will fill the tubes completely, two S-400s with 400km range missiles, leaving four tubes... perhaps two with the long range 150km range missile, so 16 missiles, one with the 50km range missile with 12 missiles and one with 9M100 missiles and 64 missiles.

    So one UKSK-M launcher with:

    S-500 x 2 = 600km range.
    S-400 x 2 = 400km range.
    9M96 x 16 = 150km range.
    9M96 x 12 = 50km range.
    9M100 x 64 = 10-15km range.

    I would imagine a corvette would not bother with the S-500s and S-400s, so you could literally double the load of the other weapons... 32 x 150km range missiles, 24 x 50km range missiles, and 128 range 10-15km range missiles... which would be a potent self defence SAM armament...

    Without stacking then a single 8 tube UKSK-M launcher could carry 2 x S-500 missiles, 2 x S-400 missiles, 12 x 9M96 missiles, 16 x 9M100 missiles.


    Just keep the redut then . Because a universal VLS that is too short for most of missiles is no longer universal.

    Depends on Reduts design... can it for example carry S-400 missiles... and if it can then it is already too long to efficiently carry 9M100 missiles without stacking... and if you add stacking to make it work then you might as well use the UKSK-M.


    Unless these launchers are instead optimized for the size of the quad packed shorter range s350 missile, that are 125 mm in diameter (vs 240mm).

    To be clear there seems to be three different missile diameters that we are talking about... the S-300/S-400 full size missiles, and then the 9M96 reduced size S-400 family missiles and then the very small 9M100 missiles.

    The Redut hatch covers seem to be sized for the S-300/400 full size SAMs as used in the S-300P and S-300F missiles, so it should be able to carry four 9M96 missiles per missile hatch because the S-400 system could carry four 9M96 in place of each older larger tube.

    The 9M96 seem to be being called S-350 in the new land system, which carries two rows of 6 launch tubes in a 12 missile launcher, but when fitted with 9M100, which allows four missiles per 9M96 tube that means 48 missiles per launcher, or 16 missiles per original S-300/S-400 tube...

    There is a video somewhere here in the naval section, which was posted a few days ago, that showed that they are developing a version of the 40N6 missile for the Redut = 400km range.

    Which suggests the reason the hatch covers and missile space is so big is because ultimately they want to be able to use the standard S-300 and S-400 sized missiles as an option and so testing the much smaller 9M96 they needed a fairing cover to fill the tube space.

    I suspect the 250km and 400km missiles would be useful... especially with air support and an air borne AWACS platform giving target data regarding very far away targets... in a net centric IADS the launch platform is not so important and could be a tiny Corvette or even a submarine if they want to get clever... remember the Yasen class has UKSK launchers... imagine being in an MPA or anti sub helo knowing the Yasen class SSGN you are hunting could launch a 9M100 lock on after launch IIR guided SAM with very little warning... they could probably hear you coming and launch based on sound...
    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 38475
    Points : 38975
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russian Navy: Status and News #5 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status and News #5

    Post  GarryB Fri May 03, 2019 1:59 am

    It was this thread:

    https://www.russiadefence.net/t7063p425-s-300-400-500-news-russian-strategic-air-defense-3#255518

    Where dino00 posted a link stating the Vityaz could carry 48 9M100s... it carries 12 9M96s... and the standard S-400 has four tubes for normal sized S-400 missiles and can carry 4 9M96 missiles per tube for a total of 16 missiles with 9M96s only, so with 9M100s it should be able to carry 64 missiles... which would look rather odd as they are much much shorter missiles...
    Isos
    Isos


    Posts : 11233
    Points : 11203
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Russian Navy: Status and News #5 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status and News #5

    Post  Isos Fri May 03, 2019 8:30 am

    https://sputniknews.com/world/201905031074663930-beluga-whale-russia-spying-norway-port/

    Russian Beluga spy in Norway. What a Face
    dino00
    dino00


    Posts : 1677
    Points : 1714
    Join date : 2012-10-12
    Age : 36
    Location : portugal

    Russian Navy: Status and News #5 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status and News #5

    Post  dino00 Fri May 03, 2019 10:20 am

    Hole wrote:There is a video somewhere here in the naval section, which was posted a few days ago, that showed that they are developing a version of the 40N6 missile for the Redut = 400km range.


    This I think
    https://iz.ru/813938/aleksei-ramm-bogdan-stepovoi/sbit-so-sveta-korabli-poluchat-novye-zenitnye-rakety

    Sponsored content


    Russian Navy: Status and News #5 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status and News #5

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Fri Feb 23, 2024 2:40 am