Project 21631: Buyan-M missile ship

GarryB wrote:Well except for the fact that they probably never made that many Granits... Remember there were Vulcans and Kh-22Ms as well...

They were supposed launch all the missiles togather in salvos in coordinated attacks between ships and bombers. So 500-1000 missiles of all types or one type coming at 20 or so ships has the same result.

Isos wrote:

GarryB wrote:Well except for the fact that they probably never made that many Granits... Remember there were Vulcans and Kh-22Ms as well...

They were supposed launch all the missiles togather in salvos in coordinated attacks between ships and bombers. So 500-1000 missiles of all types or one type coming at 20 or so ships has the same result.

true, but it is also a cost of salvo. This cost must be kept to minimum. i.e. minimal number of missiles to guarantee (i.e. have enough probability) CSG destruction.

Crew of Ingushetia assembled in St Petersburg to start (simulator?) training https://flot.com/2019/%D0%92%D0%BC%D1%844/
Presumably means should be launched fairly soon.

Radar group: small rocket ships will be the directors of fire

The Navy will have an "all-seeing eye"

https://iz.ru/875626/aleksei-ramm-aleksei-kozachenko/radarnaia-gruppa-malye-raketnye-korabli-stanut-navodchikami-ognia

Importance of numbers!

dino00 wrote:Radar group: small rocket ships will be the directors of fire

The Navy will have an "all-seeing eye"

https://iz.ru/875626/aleksei-ramm-aleksei-kozachenko/radarnaia-gruppa-malye-raketnye-korabli-stanut-navodchikami-ognia

Importance of numbers!

On the Caspian Sea... oh yes, so important! Try doing that in the North Atlantic or Western Pacific and you will watch those dingys sink at the first tall wave.

It would be an interesting concept to deploy a group of a highly automated modular Buyan style ships version with data links.
Each ship would have a different primary role and a small secondary role (layered anti-air, anti ship, anti-submarine, radar) and use these 5-6 small ships together as one team to attack larger more sophisticated ships.
I suspect most of these ships would need to combat against superior air power so they need to be able to be very stealthy to approach enemy ships as much as possible and then well defended to be able to fight their way without air cover for their weapons to reach striking range.

1- Data link
2- Stealth
3- Speed
4- layered defense
5- Few guaranteed hit missiles such as Zirkon.


Any ideas?

Vladimir79 wrote:

dino00 wrote:Radar group: small rocket ships will be the directors of fire

The Navy will have an "all-seeing eye"

https://iz.ru/875626/aleksei-ramm-aleksei-kozachenko/radarnaia-gruppa-malye-raketnye-korabli-stanut-navodchikami-ognia

Importance of numbers!

On the Caspian Sea... oh yes, so important! Try doing that in the North Atlantic or Western Pacific and you will watch those dingys sink at the first tall wave.

Isn't that precisely the reason why Russians developed Karakurts and discontinued Buyans?

PapaDragon wrote:Isn't that precisely the reason why Russians developed Karakurts and discontinued Buyans?

I thought it was a welfare project to keep Crimea's dilapidated shipyards open.

Vladimir79 wrote:

PapaDragon wrote:Isn't that precisely the reason why Russians developed Karakurts and discontinued Buyans?

I thought it was a welfare project to keep Crimea's dilapidated shipyards open.

By giving contacts to Pella in St. Petersburg? And Amur outside Vladivostok?

Only active welfare project is keeping that design studio busy with those CVN scale models and Anime-class nuclear destroyers. Good for laughs but laughs don't float...

PapaDragon wrote:

By giving contacts to Pella in St. Petersburg? And Amur outside Vladivostok?

By giving contracts to More in Crimea.

Vladimir79 wrote:

PapaDragon wrote:

By giving contacts to Pella in St. Petersburg? And Amur outside Vladivostok?

By giving contracts to More in Crimea.

Majority was made in Pella, and will be made there, rest in Amur

Crimea made like one Bykov or something (another ship class Russia is realistically capable of building, ironically because it's made to commercial standard like French ships are)

Giving contracts for ships you can actually build to several shipyards simultaneously is pretty much how you build a Navy, no other way around it

PapaDragon wrote:

Majority was made in Pella, and will be made there, rest in Amur

Crimea made like one Bykov or something (another ship class Russia is realistically capable of building, ironically because it's made to commercial standard like French ships are)

Giving contracts for ships you can actually build to several shipyards simultaneously is pretty much how you build a Navy, no other way around it

You give it to a shipyard that can specialise in it to be efficient and keep costs down. You don't parse out orders that are made to different standards. The dilapidated yards in Crimea are not efficient at anything which is why it takes them twice as many man hours to produce something.

Vladimir79 wrote:

PapaDragon wrote:

Majority was made in Pella, and will be made there, rest in Amur

Crimea made like one Bykov or something (another ship class Russia is realistically capable of building, ironically because it's made to commercial standard like French ships are)

Giving contracts for ships you can actually build to several shipyards simultaneously is pretty much how you build a Navy, no other way around it

You give it to a shipyard that can specialise in it to be efficient and keep costs down.  You don't parse out orders that are made to different standards.  The dilapidated yards in Crimea are not efficient at anything which is why it takes them twice as many man hours to produce something.  

that is the reason why their control was given to more efficient shipyards (More to Pella, Zaliv to zelenodonsk and Sevastopol repair plant to Zvezdochka), and they were given some contracts during their modernisation. They will get there. Otherwise what other way of improving the building capabilities of those shipyards could they have employed?

It is an interesting concept though is it not...

I mean previously a small ship is dead meat simply because it can be overwhelmed, and also because its small radar and generally small light weapon load make it vulnerable to systems and forces optimised to take on much larger and much more powerfully equipped vessels.

The thing is however, that the new small ships have the same Missile tubes the bigger ships have... they just don't have as many... and while their radar are smaller they share the radar picture of the battle area with all the other ships in the network so their radar view is not worse than any other ship in the group and if you want to extend your radar view then a corvette potentially with a Ka-31 AEW helicopter on board can not just extend the standard ship level radar view (ie with a relatively short radar horizon because of its height above the water and small size and power) but when the helo is airborne it can see low flying and stealthy targets out to extended ranges too... previously a radar picket would be a destroyer and the risk would be significant, but with a corvette with a Ka-31 then the risk is reduced because unlike a corvette from the 1980s it wont be armed with OSA or MANPADS and a 30mm gatling for self defence... it should be better armed than that.

I mean if they are serious about the idea they could make it better if they convert a big tanker ship into a sort of mother ship... it could be able to open the bow and let those smaller ships be carried around inside it for longer range trips like landing craft for a landing ship. Some of their smaller ships have jet boats for landing troops or policing actions at sea, and this could be a scaled up version of the same thing...

Obviously they would be better off with a real AWACS platform, but another option would be an airship as it would not need an aircraft carrier to operate it from... with nuclear power you could have electric motors to move it around and of course hydrogen can be readily converted to water and back with an electrical current and fuel cells, so you can have lifting gas and ballast at your command.

Of course for the longer term a carrier also offers aircraft for escort and identification of targets and threats and can be used for both defence and attack... and are therefore more powerful and more flexible than a slow moving airship... but how could you beat the volume and size space opportunity for a wide variety of radar and communication antenna that an airship would provide. With modern light weight materials like carbon fibre and fibreglass it could be light but strong and fire proof. You could purge the air between the hydrogen bags of normal air and fill it with nitrogen to greatly reduce the fire risk.

I know it sounds off topic, but the article above basically suggests using this corvette as a radar picket boat, so an airship or carrier based AWACS are viable alternatives worth considering... though these corvettes would be available for the role on their own they would be vulnerable and not suitable for long range long duration operations without some sort of mothership IMHO.

8th Buyan-M Ingushetia to be launched on 11th http://www.zdship.ru/press-center/news-events/3956/

Still got the 9th to come on original design before we start seeing the last 3 with Pantsir-M.

Ingushetia has been launched

https://sdelanounas.ru/blogs/120846/

Construction of upgraded Buyan-M ships might be continued after 2024

https://bmpd.livejournal.com/3674075.html

PapaDragon wrote:
Construction of upgraded Buyan-M ships might be continued after 2024

https://bmpd.livejournal.com/3674075.html

*He hopes that*

I don't know that it makes much sense to keep building them.
Finish the 2 groups of 6 certainly.
Would probably be nice to round out a group of 6 of the upgraded version.
Maybe make it 6 each in Baltic, Black Sea & Caspian?

Also I guess the fact the engines are available would be a plus factor (even if dodgy quality, actually physically arriving Chinese engines is a big advantage over not arriving Zvezda engines)

They were supposed launch all the missiles togather in salvos in coordinated attacks between ships and bombers. So 500-1000 missiles of all types or one type coming at 20 or so ships has the same result.

Granits and Vulkans had 1970s computer hardware technology... they did coordinate their attacks but only in groups of something like 24 or 32...

Also keep in mind that these are huge missiles.... even a significantly sized sub like an Oscar only carried 24 missiles, while enormous cruisers like Kirov class ships had 20, and Slava class ships had 16 missiles so the idea of thousand of missiles being used against one carrier group does not hold water.

The huge advances in engine technology means that what needed to be a 7 ton missile in the early 1980s that needed the largest ship built besides aircraft carriers to carry 20 of them could be replaced in the early 2000s by a 3 ton missile that was faster and had a similar range of about 600km or so, and now the approach to service of another missile which is probably not lighter than the Onyx, but will travel much much faster and much further too...

The critical thing is that in the 1970s and 1980s you needed an enormous vessel to carry a useful amount of these weapons... today they will fit in Corvette sized vessels and large cruisers will be able to carry them in enormous numbers... every ship can carry a couple... and can share in a data network to allow them to use them efficiently too.

Also I guess the fact the engines are available would be a plus factor (even if dodgy quality, actually physically arriving Chinese engines is a big advantage over not arriving Zvezda engines)

Engines from Zvezda will have more value than engines from China... marine diesels can be used in a few different ways for lots of different things and are a useful thing to have.

Granits and Vulkans had 1970s computer hardware technology... they did coordinate their attacks but only in groups of something like 24 or 32...

Also keep in mind that these are huge missiles.... even a significantly sized sub like an Oscar only carried 24 missiles, while enormous cruisers like Kirov class ships had 20, and Slava class ships had 16 missiles so the idea of thousand of missiles being used against one carrier group does not hold water

4 kirov (80 missiles) + 4 kiev (32 missiles) + should have had 13 Oscar (312 missiles) + 4 slava (64 missiles) + kuznetsov (12 missiles) + 21 Sovs (168 missiles) + 36 Nanushka corvette (216) + 125 Tu-16 (125-250 missiles) + 497 build tu-22M (497-1491 missiles).

That's 2625 ready to fire missiles and I'm not counting missiles boats, coastal missiles and tactical fighter/bombers and other subs that could carry anti ship missiles.

Of course it would be impossible to coordinate all that but US forces were not all in the atlantic but they would try to launch them so that a big part come at the same time on the carrier groups. Subs would also use their 650mm from 70km away.

2600 missiles for soviet industry was nothing huge. They could make them in 1 month if they turned their eco to war time mode.

US air defence systems also had 70-80s tech computers so I doubt they could intercept that much missiles.

4 kirov (80 missiles) + 4 kiev (32 missiles) + should have had 13 Oscar (312 missiles) + 4 slava (64 missiles) + kuznetsov (12 missiles) + 21 Sovs (168 missiles) + 36 Nanushka corvette (216) + 125 Tu-16 (125-250 missiles) + 497 build tu-22M (497-1491 missiles).

That's 2625 ready to fire missiles and I'm not counting missiles boats, coastal missiles and tactical fighter/bombers and other subs that could carry anti ship missiles.

That is theoretical, and when did you ever see more than two Kirovs or Kievs or Slava class ships operating together... even during an exercise.

Very simply the US didn't have a single target worthy of gathering more than 100 missiles for use against it, so while there were plenty of anti ship missiles there most likely would be fired at ships rather than carriers most of the time.

With the old missiles speed was intended to make up for the long range detection of a carrier group, so it was expected quite a few would be shot down but that some would always make it through... today on the verge of hypersonic missiles entering service where even with plenty of warning even the best air defences would struggle to take down one missile let alone half a dozen or more, the list is dramatically changed... you mentioned four battle cruisers and four cruisers and five carrier cruisers and some subs and destroyers and corvettes... today you would have to mention every ship with UKSK launchers... which will pretty much be all of them, and the numbers on board will explode... from 80 missiles across four Kirovs to two kirovs with 160 missiles... from 13 Oscars with 312 missiles between them to rather less but 72 missiles per sub... etc etc

the missiles themselves operated in packs of 24 - 32 depending upon the model so attacks with multiples of this number made sense but they calculated the number they launched for each attack depending upon what was present in terms of AEGIS class ships and carriers etc... and the warhead balance of the missiles being fired...

That's 2625 ready to fire missiles and I'm not counting missiles boats, coastal missiles and tactical fighter/bombers and other subs that could carry anti ship missiles.

The coastal missile batteries were equipped with Styx missiles during the cold war... better than nothing and certainly able to clobber some targets, but not something to skite about...

Of course it would be impossible to coordinate all that but US forces were not all in the atlantic but they would try to launch them so that a big part come at the same time on the carrier groups. Subs would also use their 650mm from 70km away.

The attack would be carefully coordinated but they would never have all their ships in one place for the attack, just like the US would never have enough ships in any one place to justify firing that number of weapons all at once.

The 650mm torpedoes would be timed to arrive just as the missiles were arriving so loss of steering making them sitting ducks for incoming missiles.

US air defence systems also had 70-80s tech computers so I doubt they could intercept that much missiles.

The only US air defence systems worth a damn are on their AEGIS class ships... and it wasn't bad... but any defence can be overwhelmed...

I know it is theorical. US navy is not in just one fleet neither soviet was. But the numbers were still in favor of soviet. Tu-23M could be moved anywhere in USSR to concentrate a huge amount of kh-22 against any carrier group.

Coordinated is automatically done by missiles in flight like you say in groups if 24 but they still can launch 3 or 4 group to reach the carier in the same time.

GarryB wrote:The only US air defence systems worth a damn are on their AEGIS class ships... and it wasn't bad... but any defence can be overwhelmed...

...except the USS Vincennes couldn't tell the difference between an Iranian Airbus A300 (on a regularly scheduled flight flying with civvie transponders and climbing to cruising altitude) and an F-14 Tomcat (allegedly conducting an attack run with non-existent air-to-ground munitions).

Murican butt-fuckery at it finest. All hail to the Monkey Empire.