Promising destroyer "Lider-class"

i know I wanted to write supersonic, but i made a mistake. Fixing it now in the text

Well with new fuel the Onyx is reportedly able to fly further and faster... why wouldn't older missiles improve performance the same?

I would imagine a 7 ton Granit is mostly fuel so improved energy fuel should significantly improve its performance... it uses a ramjet engine so the throttle could be used intelligently to maximise performance (speed and range)...

GarryB wrote:Well with new fuel the Onyx is reportedly able to fly further and faster... why wouldn't older missiles improve performance the same?

Some Indian news channels are posting videos of a Solid Fueled Ducted Ramjet propelled missile system which they say India is developing with Russia

https://twitter.com/delhidefence/status/1226119990425743365?s=20

Isos wrote:China has build the last 15 years a huge fleet and they just annouced they will switch production for bigger ships only, like WTF, they already build a shiton of big ships with plenty of VLS. In 15 years they will be 2x bigger than US navy.

Russia on the other hand is not focusing on building bigger ships. They are building smaller ships, because in their assessment, small ships are the future.

China does not have a formidable foe in Asia. Countries like Japan and India are pushovers.

jhelb wrote:

Isos wrote:China has build the last 15 years a huge fleet and they just annouced they will switch production for bigger ships only, like WTF, they already build a shiton of big ships with plenty of VLS. In 15 years they will be 2x bigger than US navy.

Russia on the other hand is not focusing on building bigger ships. They are building smaller ships, because in their assessment, small ships are the future.

China does not have a formidable foe in Asia. Countries like Japan and India are pushovers.

Russia needs ships to protect its borders. Not control the world like US failed to with 700 billion $ budget. For that smaller ships with uksk able to launch hypersonic missiles is enough.

Arrow wrote:

. For now, they are building very slowly small frigates of type 22350. Since 2006, they have launched two such frigates. It's a parody. Where to them to the great destroyers. Maybe in 2050 we will see the first Russian destroyer with a displacement of 12,000 tons. In addition, now the military budget will be cut, because a lot of money will go to social. There is no question of any Russian navy for the next decades  only small rocket ships and submarines. In a few years they will tire out another 2 units 22350.

Everybody is aware of the reasons of the delays. E.g. most the shipbuilding industry in disarray after many years of lack of orders and investment and for 22350 frigates the main issues was with the equipment, sensors and weapon systems still in development and testing, plus after 2014 the issues with the unavailability of ukrainian gas turbines.

Probably you are aware that in the same years the baltic shipyard and later the yantar shipyard were able to build and deliver taiwar frigates for india in 3 years, since they did not have these equipment issues.


22350 are not small frigates, they are 5400 tons full  load and are better armed than french or other nato states frigates with even higher displacement (e.g. 7000 tons).

Russia is  not cutting military budget because otherwise there are no money for social programs and infrastructures.
One of the priority till now has also been the creation of large "rainy day" funds, and now this tasks has been accomplished. Furthermore in the past there were much more money allocated to the navy than what they were actually able to spend, due to shipyard problems,  supply chain and development problems and also due to the engine issues. The gas turbine dependencies on the Ukraine now has been solved, and they are testing the new reduction gears from Zvezda, that remained the last show stopper.

There are still some issues with delays in production of some diesel engines (again from Zvezda in Saint Petersburg), but this concerns only the smaller ships. As far as I know there are no issues with the diesel engines from Kolomensky Zavod that go on 22350 frigates.

Furthermore 22350M will probably have only gas turbine propulsion (like udaloy class or also the american burke class destroyer).

As already said they will start building 2 additional 22350 (number 7 and 8 ) this year in Severnaya verf, and if all the other issues are solved, they could even assign other shipyards to the tasks (e.g. yantar, once they finish building the  11356 frigates for India, or even the other 2 shipyards in Saint Petersburg (admiralty shipyard and baltic shipyard), according to their other order books and availability). All the mentioned shipyard are more than capable to build also 8000 tons frigate/destroyers, and on top of that zaliv shipyard in crimea can build frigates even  without using the main drydock (that  will be busy with LHD), since it used to build 1135 frigates in soviet times.

So, please stop trolling. A few questions now and then are ok, but your attitude starts to be annoying...

Arrow wrote: that's why China is building over 25 destroyers at once, not two frigates for 15 years. Russia has no industry to build a fleet and is too poor for it.

Chinese destroyers, frigates etc might not be able to withstand the warm waters of Asia and Africa. Because their engines are not suited for tropical climate. British destroyers broke down in the gulf several times.

So even if China pops out 20+ ships every year they might not be able to travel into Asian and African water.

For now, they are building very slowly small frigates of type 22350. Since 2006, they have launched two such frigates. It's a parody.

I don't see the US pumping out Ford class carriers or Zumwalt destroyers or LCA frigate substitutes... do you think it might be because they are brand new designs that are totally untested that are more complicated than one copy of Microsoft Windows that need to be tested and checked and assessed to be good enough for an enormous range of jobs in a range of environments?

Do you think the English might feel the same when finding their engine cooling system works in the north atlantic but not in the warmer waters of the med... and how many thousands of ships have they produced in the last 30 years?

Once they get the design and mix of weapons and sensors working properly they can increase production and then look at the export market too, but mass producing a type before the first one even hits the water is stupid unless you are very confident about the systems and equipment... China can be confident about their systems and equipment because most of it is based on Russian stuff.

Where to them to the great destroyers. Maybe in 2050 we will see the first Russian destroyer with a displacement of 12,000 tons.

They already have several destroyer and two cruiser sized vessels that will be fine for the next decade as front line vessels and then next two or three decades as reserve vessels.

In addition, now the military budget will be cut, because a lot of money will go to social.

Having large numbers of brand new destroyers and brand new cruisers and brand new CVNs would mean the budget could not be cut and would need to be massively expanded in fact... and the brand new nature of most of the technology would mean they would be terribly unreliable... they might end up with a whole lot of Ford juniors and Zumwalt juniors... but rather cheaper... though no less of an economic burden to Russia.

There is no question of any Russian navy for the next decades only small rocket ships and submarines.

One of their current Frigates could take on and probably defeat any Naval fleet the British chose to send to the Arctic... even more so when those 16 missiles are Zircons... so I guess if the Russian navy is crap, then the Royal Navy is worse...

In a few years they will tire out another 2 units 22350. Every country that wants to count needs a powerful navy.

The escape of the UK from the EU will change things rather dramatically over the next few years... alone and scared the UK is going to want to establish closer ties to all sorts of countries outside the west... they will want closer ties with the US but not too close because no one likes rapey rapey American that much... but they are also going to have to change their relationship with both Russia and China or they really are in the shit...

We will see how things go, but I would expect the new sailors in the Russian Navy will be getting all sorts of new technology and gear, while British sailors will be hearing about this budget and that budget being cut so they can't do this any more...

That's why the US has a huge navy, that's why China is building over 25 destroyers at once, not two frigates for 15 years. Russia has no industry to build a fleet and is too poor for it.

The Russians could have easily built 25 destroyers if they wanted to go for slightly upgraded old models... they made quite a few for India quickly enough.

Russia has no need for a Soviet sized fleet, and no long range foreign partnerships that requires a blue sea navy right now.

They are building up their skills and fleet and they are doing it sensibly without pissing away money like the US Navy clearly is... I mean 13 billion for one CVN, plus 15 billion for three Zumwalt ships and about 17 billion for the LCA fiasco... that is more than the entire Russian military budget for the year... and none of them will be useful in the next half decade. Of course nothing compared with the 1.5 trillion spent on the F-35...

BTW the Russians tried to speed up things with Chinese diesel engines based on German models they could no longer buy and they turned out to be totally unreliable and offer nothing like the performance and reliability of the German models... which is fine... there is a reason Germany sells diesel engines... they make good ones, so for those unable to buy them their options are limited... Russia went for Chiense diesels and it was a mistake.

Russia probably could have made their own diesels and they could have been just as unreliable... but they could have spent money working and developing them to make them reliable... there is no point in waiting for China to make their diesels reliable... which they no doubt will eventually... for their own use and export use, but for now their name in diesel engines is not good... but I am sure that will be corrected... but it is in Russian interests to sort out diesel engine production for themselves.

Their current methodology is related families of things... engines, ships, weapons, etc etc, so developing a new diesel engine means a scalable one that can be used for small things like small boats and aircraft etc, but using the same basic design in much larger platforms scaled up... it will take longer than just making one engine but in the long term it means a family range of engines developed much cheaper and enabling a wider variety of related parts and systems, unifying use and maintainence and support across the range of engine sizes.

It is the same with their Army vehicles... in the past they developed a BMP and a BTR and a T series tank and also had a range of other vehicle types like MTLB and various variants of the BMP and BTR and T series vehicles for mine clearing and engineer and even artillery and anti aircraft use (MSTA and ZSU-57-2 both used T series tank chassis). They have now unified their designs into four basic platforms... Armata heavy tracked, Kurganets medium tracked, Boomerang medium wheeled and Typhoon light wheeled vehicle families and eventually all their support vehicles will be based on these platforms... it will take quite a while but the benefits are clear.

It is the same with their ships... they can and are building ships, but they don't need thousands of ships so production of the level of China right now would be absurd because in 10 years when they have built destroyers and cruisers and CVNs... then what do they do? Those ships will last 30 years so all that production capacity would be sitting idle... so not only expensive but rapidly making itself redundant. Also while making all these ships they wont be able to make other ships that are needed like icebreakers and tankers and large gas carriers....

Doing it slowly is not a sign of weakness, it is a sign of longer term planning and a very different situation and set of goals. China clearly wants to dominate its local waters and it needs lots of ships very quickly to do so... this will have European powers scared and the US upset because they liked to talk about large stretches of ocean as being in their total control and this will change that.... boo hoo... screw them...

The massive build up of Chinese ships is no threat to Russia... they are building destroyers and carriers... so what?

Chinese destroyers, frigates etc might not be able to withstand the warm waters of Asia and Africa. Because their engines are not suited for tropical climate. British destroyers broke down in the gulf several times.

This sort of thing happens when you rush production and proper testing... of course some times it can't be helped...

With all due respect GarryB, why do you bother with lengthy replies to the nonsense that spews from that twat? The guy is an incurable idiot who is taking advantage of our tolerance.

Arrow wrote:

AB has 96 VLS. Project 22350M has 48 VLS + 32 VLS air defence system? AB is a total of 62 ships plus Ticonderoga more then 20 ships with 120 VLS. The 22350M frigate is zero and will be zero for the next 10 years. Now Russia has only two modern frigate 22350. There is nothing to compare with US NAVY because it is a chasm. Russia has one Kirov in service plus another under renovation.

Does not really matter, Russias subs and planes with their focus on long range supersonic antiship missiles can take on those ships NP. I think Russia builds surface warships with the belief they are really to show the flag and a peace time weapon. In war it will be planes and subs that will be the only things that can survive.

Northern Design Bureau has suspended work on a promising nuclear destroyer due to the lack of a decision by the Russian Defense Ministry


Full
https://www.militarynews.ru/story.asp?rid=1&nid=530487&lang=RU

They don't know what to do with the Navy, the procurement process of the Russian Navy in the surface component is a pathetic joke.

It's for the best

Lider was not happening anyway and while Super Gorshkov would have been nice it would make little sense to go ahead with it when standard Gorshkov is still in single digits

They should refocus 100% on projects they have now: Karakurts, Steregushi & derivatives, Gorshkovs, Grens and that new helicopter carrier

Fleet needs fresh hulls now, fancy projects can wait until old stuff is finally replaced 1 for 1

kvs wrote:Spreading the eggs over many smaller baskets is better than having them all in a few large baskets.    These large destroyer projects
smack of WWII era thinking.    A nice choice of missiles can make a frigate more powerful than any WWII destroyer.    The game
has changed and expensive vanity projects are hard to justify.

If you are talking about Gorshkov-M, you aren't being serious.

kvs wrote:Spreading the eggs over many smaller baskets is better than having them all in a few large baskets.    These large destroyer projects
smack of WWII era thinking.    A nice choice of missiles can make a frigate more powerful than any WWII destroyer.    The game
has changed and expensive vanity projects are hard to justify.

This is the biggest problem of the Russian Navy surface construction, bad for the shipyards, bad for the Navy. You think it's great having a million different Corvette/frigates type ships.

To Kvs and PapaDragon

You understand that the Russian Navy has given up on a ship borne long range aid right? At least seriously delayed.
Good luck putting long range sam on buyan.

Understandable for the Lider but Gorshkov M was supposed to be only a taller Gorshkov. It's not a hard thing to do and cost should have been easily controlled because only engine would be different with more structure at mid ship and more but same weapons.

kvs wrote:If the Lider is being dropped, then the Gorshkov M series is going to be suspended too.   If the latter was designed based on
assuming the procurement of the former, then it is defunct.   A new design to replace both the Lider and the Gorshkov M is
needed.  

All these media sources are such crap.   They feed sensationalist clickbait fragments that are basically worthless.

They already proposed the project 21956 which is based on Udaloy design/size. A same upgrade as they did with Krivak/Grigorovitch. That would need a redesign to include new tech but would be a very good replacement for Slava/Udaloy/Sovs.

They are upgrading their udaloys so they have experience with this design. But the best would be a Gorshkov M since it is similar to the Gorshkov.

kvs wrote:If the Lider is being dropped, then the Gorshkov M series is going to be suspended too.   If the latter was designed based on
assuming the procurement of the former, then it is defunct.   A new design to replace both the Lider and the Gorshkov M is
needed.  

All these media sources are such crap.   They feed sensationalist clickbait fragments that are basically worthless.

Company annual report...is in the text...a new design By whom? They have completed the design and the people who should have a vision of what the Russian Navy should look like in the future just waits, a new design

dino00 wrote:To Kvs and PapaDragon
You understand that the Russian Navy has given up on a ship borne long range aid right? At least seriously delayed.
Good luck putting long range sam on buyan.

They already have long range SAMs on Gorshkovs

Isos wrote:Understandable for the Lider but Gorshkov M was supposed to be only a taller Gorshkov. It's not a hard thing to do and cost should have been easily controlled because only engine would be different with more structure at mid ship and more but same weapons.

Gorshkov with 3x8 UKSK did a lot to remove need for Gorshkov-M, 24 heavy missiles are no joke especially if they are Onyx/Zircon

My guess is that designers were told to come up with enlarged Gorshkov and to keep it simple but as usual they went full retard and in complete disregard for reality they drew up some idiotic bullshit like that Anime-class Lider that's still making rounds on meme websites and would be just as simple and logical to build

PapaDragon wrote:

My guess is that designers were told to come up with enlarged Gorshkov and to keep it simple but as usual they went full retard and in complete disregard for reality they drew up some idiotic bullshit like that Anime-class Lider that's still making rounds on meme websites and would be just as simple and logical to build

"The document says that in December 2019, the development of a preliminary design of the ship of the ocean zone 22350M was completed. The commission, appointed by the Department of Defense for the provision of state defense orders, has accepted the draft design. On December 25, an act of the commission was submitted to the department with a proposal to accept the work performed."

The Navy doesn't know what it wants, no vision.

"They already have long range SAMs on Gorshkovs"

Ok very long range ones