Questions Thread: Russian Navy

How easily could the s-300 revolver launchers on the kirovs, slavas and udaloys be modified to fire S400s of the same size?

KomissarBojanchev wrote:How easily could the s-300 revolver launchers on the kirovs, slavas and udaloys be modified to fire S400s of the same size?

Nothing to change in the lunchers I think. But all the softwares, computers and radars have to be changed. Udaloys doesn't have S-300. It carries naval Tor with very small VLS. Impossible to change unless you change the structure of the ship.

It's a shame they didn't put S-300 at least on the Udaloy II. But the tactic was to use them with Slavas (S-300) and Sovrommenys (naval Buk) so they it is an integrated air defenece like army has. Tor is very good at intercepting cruisse missiles and anti ship missiles that would have been the job of the Udaloys while Sovremenys and Slava would intercept fighters and bombers. At the time they had 20 of each, 3 slava and 4 Kirov with 7 more Slavas to be build. Now Gorshkov class replace all of them and instade of having 15 Udaloy and 15 Sov you can have 30 Gorshkov with much better weapons.

Isos wrote:

KomissarBojanchev wrote:How easily could the s-300 revolver launchers on the kirovs, slavas and udaloys be modified to fire S400s of the same size?

Nothing to change in the lunchers I think. But all the softwares, computers and radars have to be changed. Udaloys hasn't got S-300. It carries naval Tor with very small VLS.

It's a shame they didn't put S-300 at least on the Udaloy II. But the tactic was to use them with Slavas (S-300) and Sovrommenys (naval Buk) so they it is an integrated air defenece like army has. Tor is very good at intercepting cruisse missiles and anti ship missiles that would have been the job of the Udaloys while Sovremenys and Slava would intercept fighters and bombers. At the time they had 20 of each, 3 slava and 4 Kirov with 7 more Slavas to be build. Now Gorshkov class replace all of them and instade of having 15 Udaloy and 15 Sov you can have 30 Gorshkov with much better weapons.

Then what are the 4 lids on the bow of the udaloys?Also then upgrading to S400s shouldnt take long since not that much crap needs to be removed and replaced. It would be great if the slavas get S400s. Thats because its completely impossible for Tussia to build more than 5 gorshkovs and put them into service in less than 40 years.

Then what are the 4 lids on the bow of the udaloys?Also then upgrading to S400s shouldnt take long since not that much crap needs to be removed and replaced. It would be great if the slavas get S400s. Thats because its completely impossible for Tussia to build more than 5 gorshkovs and put them into service in less than 40 years.

Naval tor. They also have lunchers at mid-ship near the helicopter hangar for a total of 64 missiles. Nakhimov will have S-400. Slava not likely they never said anything about that but it wouldn't be hard for them to upgrade them and why not buy the Ukrainian one and put Oniks lunchers and S-400 on it for a total of 4 Slavas and 2 upgraded Kirov.

Isos wrote:

Then what are the 4 lids on the bow of the udaloys?Also then upgrading to S400s shouldnt take long since not that much crap needs to be removed and replaced. It would be great if the slavas get S400s. Thats because its completely impossible for Tussia to build more than 5 gorshkovs and put them into service in less than 40 years.

Naval tor. They also have lunchers at mid-ship near the helicopter hangar for a total of 64 missiles. Nakhimov will have S-400. Slava not likely they never said anything about that but it wouldn't be hard for them to upgrade them and why not buy the Ukrainian one and put Oniks lunchers and S-400 on it for a total of 4 Slavas and 2 upgraded Kirov.

I think the answer to that is quite clearly that A) The ships going to the breakers and that B) Ukraine would literally rather cut off their nose to spite their face when it comes to Russia

DasVivo wrote:.............
I think the answer to that is quite clearly that A) The ships going to the breakers and that B) Ukraine would literally rather cut off their nose to spite their face when it comes to Russia

Also, C) Russia said long before 2014 that they have no plans whatsoever to go anywhere near that pile of scrap metal.

Isos wrote:

Then what are the 4 lids on the bow of the udaloys?Also then upgrading to S400s shouldnt take long since not that much crap needs to be removed and replaced. It would be great if the slavas get S400s. Thats because its completely impossible for Tussia to build more than 5 gorshkovs and put them into service in less than 40 years.

Naval tor. They also have lunchers at mid-ship near the helicopter hangar for a total of 64 missiles. Nakhimov will have S-400. Slava not likely they never said anything about that but it wouldn't be hard for them to upgrade them and why not buy the Ukrainian one and put Oniks lunchers and S-400 on it for a total of 4 Slavas and 2 upgraded Kirov.

The Russian navy should expect the slavas to be operational for at least 40 more years because all russian shipbuilders have proven themselves to be utterly incapable of building anything other than diesel subs snd corvettes within scceptable timeframes. When Russia can build liders in less than 4 years(a long time from now)then we can talk about scrapping slavas. Otherwise they should be upgraded mandatorily with S400s and UKSKs if possible ASAP.

The revolving launchers of the S-300 system on the Kirovs is rather redundant and takes up rather more space than is needed... the S-400 in the form of a vertical launch system with fixed cells would be more compact and more reliable as there is no moving parts.

The old S-300 system was designed that way to crew could access and inspect the missiles from below decks... the new models have built in diagnostic systems and could remain in their cells till launch.

Equally with the old TOR system the new missiles are much smaller... on the old TOR land vehicle it carried 8 ready to fire missiles in its turret... the upgraded late model missile had twice that many... 16 missiles in the same sized turret.

I would expect with the new missiles the 64 tubes could be replaced with 128 tubes fairly easily.

GarryB wrote:The revolving launchers of the S-300 system on the Kirovs is rather redundant and takes up rather more space than is needed... the S-400 in the form of a vertical launch system with fixed cells would be more compact and more reliable as there is no moving parts.

The old S-300 system was designed that way to crew could access and inspect the missiles from below decks... the new models have built in diagnostic systems and could remain in their cells till launch.

Equally with the old TOR system the new missiles are much smaller... on the old TOR land vehicle it carried 8 ready to fire missiles in its turret... the upgraded late model missile had twice that many... 16 missiles in the same sized turret.

I would expect with the new missiles the 64 tubes could be replaced with 128 tubes fairly easily.

Right for VLS.

I don't think they will upgrade Udaloys. Replacing missiles is one thing but they also have to put new sensors to use them.

The Udaloy and Sovremmeny are difficult to upgrade with UKSK as the old missiles are heavily angled while the UKSK is not and is better penetrating the deck space 4-6 levels worth.

Perhaps putting a hull extension could be an option, while replacing all the old material on board with new equipment should free up a lot of space internally.

New sensors will be multifunction and should also take up rather less space too.

GarryB wrote:The Udaloy and Sovremmeny are difficult to upgrade with UKSK as the old missiles are heavily angled while the UKSK is not and is better penetrating the deck space 4-6 levels worth.

Perhaps putting a hull extension could be an option, while replacing all the old material on board with new equipment should free up a lot of space internally.

New sensors will be multifunction and should also take up rather less space too.

Just my 2 cents,

The Udaloys will probably not see a major upgrade on their air defense because of the cost an time restraints, this is a fleet that will not server for more than another 10 years effectively, and that probably does not include all of them.

The Tor system is a good system, fast, accurate and small, build to defend against small, sea skimming missiles, they just need to upgraded it as best as they can, new missiles with more resistance to jamming and better maneuverability and better sensors so more targets can be targeted or at least more accurately, 64 missiles total is plenty.

As far as I understand it, each FC/tracking radar (two of them total) can target 4 targets (with 2 missile for each) or guide 4 missiles, does somebody know which one is right?

Now the thing that they can upgrade is, firstly, the main gun, remove the two 100 mm guns, replace the first one with the 130 mm gun like the one on the Adm. Gorskov. and instead of the second one put at leas 2 UKSK modules.

The Udaloy is a big ship, the platform where the second gun stands is rather larger, practically there is room for at least 4 UKSK modules, more importantly the gun that it there is a weapon that already penetrates the interior of the ship so there already is a "hole" there, presumably all cables, pipes etc. are routed away from this place, so this could be enlarged for at least 2-3 UKSK with not much work.

At this point they don't even need the launchers on the side, especially if they put more than 2 UKSKs.

Good point miroslav

GarryB wrote:The Udaloy and Sovremmeny are difficult to upgrade with UKSK as the old missiles are heavily angled while the UKSK is not and is better penetrating the deck space 4-6 levels worth.

Perhaps putting a hull extension could be an option, while replacing all the old material on board with new equipment should free up a lot of space internally.

New sensors will be multifunction and should also take up rather less space too.

I personally don't think that Udaloys or Sovremenniys will see large scale modernizations (or maybe just a little bit) for the following reasons:

1.) There are around 5 Sovremenniys and 6 Udaloys in service, most of them are older than 30 years.

2.) Sovremenniys were plagued with lots of issues with their propulsion systems, and developing a new would take additional time, while putting them into production would somewhat bog down current engine productions (at NPO Saturn for Gorshkovs or at Zvezda for Karakurts).

3.) Combat readiness of both will be costlier and costlier to upkeep over time.

4.) Equipping both classes with UKSKs would make little sense as by 2025 there would be around 6-7 Gorshkovs in service, and they could take on their duties for a while until a new destroyer class emerges.

5.) Maybe or maybe not, these ships are not really of great strategic importance like Kirovs or Slavas. And don't get me wrong here, by this I don't mean that destroyers are less significant than cruisers, I only want to point out that these destroyers could serve 8-10 years from now just fine.

In conclusion, I think that both current destroyer classes should serve until let's say early 2030s

Benya wrote:

GarryB wrote:The Udaloy and Sovremmeny are difficult to upgrade with UKSK as the old missiles are heavily angled while the UKSK is not and is better penetrating the deck space 4-6 levels worth.

Perhaps putting a hull extension could be an option, while replacing all the old material on board with new equipment should free up a lot of space internally.

New sensors will be multifunction and should also take up rather less space too.

I personally don't think that Udaloys or Sovremenniys will see large scale modernizations (or maybe just a little bit) for the following reasons:

1.) There are around 5 Sovremenniys and 6 Udaloys in service, most of them are older than 30 years.

2.) Sovremenniys were plagued with lots of issues with their propulsion systems, and developing a new would take additional time, while putting them into production would somewhat bog down current engine productions (at NPO Saturn for Gorshkovs or at Zvezda for Karakurts).

3.) Combat readiness of both will be costlier and costlier to upkeep over time.

4.) Equipping both classes with UKSKs would make little sense as by 2025 there would be around 6-7 Gorshkovs in service, and they could take on their duties for a while until a new destroyer class emerges.

5.) Maybe or maybe not, these ships are not really of great strategic importance like Kirovs or Slavas. And don't get me wrong here, by this I don't mean that destroyers are less significant than cruisers, I only want to point out that these destroyers could serve 8-10 years from now just fine.

In conclusion, I think that both current destroyer classes should serve until let's say early 2030s

Sovs are dead ship. They don't even use them. For joint exercices they send slavas or udalois. They should replace them the faster they can by gorshkovs or 21956 destroyers. Chinese sovs on the other hand are newer with better engines and electronics, upgraded with VLS. Very good ships. Russians ones are too old to be modernized.

Udaloys are good, they could give them Urans for anti ship capabilities. Udaloys II is very good but just 1 is in service.

Slavas and kirivs are good but they have few of them. Thzy need frigates and destroyer to go with them.

There are plans or talks to do a upgrade and life extension of some / all of the Udaloy's but have heard nothing in regards to the Sovremmeny. By the way I believe only 3 of them are still active (North, Baltic and Pacific). Would not be surprised if the Gorshkovs actually replace them.

franco wrote:There are plans or talks to do a upgrade and life extension of some / all of the Udaloy's but have heard nothing in regards to the Sovremmeny. By the way I believe only 3 of them are still active (North, Baltic and Pacific). Would not be surprised if the Gorshkovs actually replace them.

Last I looked it appeared that:
Bystryy - Pacific Fleet
Nastoychivyy - Baltic Fleet
Admiral Ushakov - Northern Fleet

Burnyy - Pacific Fleet (Currently being overhauled, not a deep modernization)
Bespokiynyy - Baltic Fleet (Limited talk of bringing it back with I imagine, minor overhaul to extend life, not deep modernization)
Bezboyaznennyy - Pacific Fleet (Reserve, no updates on decomission or plans to reintroduce it)

Based on the fact they certainly don't appear to be investing in them this late in the game my guess is indeed they'll be simply be maintained as placeholders to fill the ranks until a sufficient number of Gorshkovs and others (Grigorovichs etc) can relieve them somewhat..

DasVivo wrote:

franco wrote:There are plans or talks to do a upgrade and life extension of some / all of the Udaloy's but have heard nothing in regards to the Sovremmeny. By the way I believe only 3 of them are still active (North, Baltic and Pacific). Would not be surprised if the Gorshkovs actually replace them.

Last I looked it appeared that:
Bystryy - Pacific Fleet
Nastoychivyy - Baltic Fleet
Admiral Ushakov - Northern Fleet

Burnyy - Pacific Fleet (Currently being overhauled, not a deep modernization)
Bespokiynyy - Baltic Fleet (Limited talk of bringing it back with I imagine, minor overhaul to extend life, not deep modernization)
Bezboyaznennyy - Pacific Fleet (Reserve, no updates on decomission or plans to reintroduce it)

Based on the fact they certainly don't appear to be investing in them this late in the game my guess is indeed they'll be simply be maintained as placeholders to fill the ranks until a sufficient number of Gorshkovs and others (Grigorovichs etc) can relieve them somewhat..

But there will never be enough gorshkovs to replace them before 2030 and the grigoroviches are much weaker than them. The Grigoroviches are there to replace the neustrashimy and burevestniks, not full blown destroyers.

Why? There will be atleast 8 Gorshkovs by 2030 (maybe more, including the larger variant), and probably 1 or 2 Liders aswell.

But there will never be enough gorshkovs to replace them before 2030 and the grigoroviches are much weaker than them. The Grigoroviches are there to replace the neustrashimy and burevestniks, not full blown destroyers.

In terms of capabilities grigorovivitch are better than a ship that is 30 years old. The only point where it is not is th range. For the price of 1 Sov you have 3 grigorovitchs. Missile are by far better because they are newer, it is stealth and has UKSK for multi role missions.

What is the watch system onboard Russian Navy ships?

Are ship launched Anti-Sub missiles near useless?

They seem to have an insufficient range to destroy detected subs and there's no enough ships equipped with them to scour enough sea area. Also most subs have torpedos with a larger range than anti-sub missiles. Even Russia's 650mm torp has longer range(~100km) than the klub antisub missile(~40km). Also, most US subs can simply lob 100s of harpoons far beyond the range of them. Not even the rastrub has enough range. The only way for ships to reliably hunt down subs before they can unload their weapons seems to be by helicopter. Therefore, the existence of dedicated anti-sub ships like the udaloy was unjustified since helicopters launched from conventional warships are far more effective.

KomissarBojanchev wrote:They seem to have an insufficient range to destroy detected subs and there's no enough ships equipped with them to scour enough sea area. Also most subs have torpedos with a larger range than anti-sub missiles. Even Russia's 650mm torp has longer range(~100km) than the klub antisub missile(~40km). Also, most US subs can simply lob 100s of harpoons far beyond the range of them. Not even the rastrub has enough range. The only way for ships to reliably hunt down subs before they can unload their weapons seems to be by helicopter. Therefore, the existence of dedicated anti-sub ships like the udaloy was unjustified since helicopters launched from conventional warships are far more effective.

It is still better than torpedos because the missile will fall just near the target and the little torpedo will have to make a run of some seconds to reach the sub. The engagement will last 2 or 3 minutes while firing a torpedo at 100 km will take 1h to reach the target so the target will have 1 hours to take evasive actions and torpedos are noisy so detecting them is easy for trained crew.

Its is also faster than helicopters.

Just like missiles, torpedos are not lunched at max range because they will have to manoeuvre to hit the target because the target will change its way when it detect the lunch.

I think they gave a 40 km to the kalibr because it is the max detection range against subs for a ship. If they want to engage further they have helicopters.

KomissarBojanchev wrote:They seem to have an insufficient range to destroy detected subs and there's no enough ships equipped with them to scour enough sea area. Also most subs have torpedos with a larger range than anti-sub missiles. Even Russia's 650mm torp has longer range(~100km) than the klub antisub missile(~40km). Also, most US subs can simply lob 100s of harpoons far beyond the range of them. Not even the rastrub has enough range. The only way for ships to reliably hunt down subs before they can unload their weapons seems to be by helicopter. Therefore, the existence of dedicated anti-sub ships like the udaloy was unjustified since helicopters launched from conventional warships are far more effective.

Subs can't attack that easy! They must be in the right position and correct tactic is needed. After a attack their position is revealed and subs are not that fast. Main problem is...subs can't defend really against air threats and small fast ships. So the sub becomes the prey.

Surface ships have better sensors to scan a wide area, subs are limited to data input or their own sensors. Subs still are great combatants, with special role..nuclear triad, sneak behind enemy lines and attack convoys, surprise against a unwary opponent etc.

And yes that's correct...best way to hunt subs are helicopter. That's why most bigger ships have a helipad.

With Klub the first a sub will know it is under attack is when a torpedo splashes into the water near the sub and starts scanning for it.

For that sub to attack that ship means firing a torpedo which will more than likely be detected during the time it will take to get to the target...

Longer range ballistic anti sub missiles don't exist because detecting enemy subs at longer range is just so unlikely unless they start actively pinging or launch weapons...

At mach 2.5 an anti sub missile is actually rather fast... and silent to those underwater...