Home
Latest images
Register
Log in
Vladimir79 wrote:hoom wrote:20385 was going to have MTUs.
They've put in Kolomnas with a new domestic gearbox. (but less power than the MTUs would have had)
The Kolomnas have been failures with constant breakdowns, intense vibrations, faulty sensors, failed hydraulic power, broken crankshafts... problems too long to list. The ships cannot even go into reverse and not fit for open seas. Still waiting on that gearbox... as if that will magically fix the problems. The whole range of engines is in prototype stage, another decade before it could be proven and a bunch of shells with no reliable engines.
+75
flamming_python
dino00
PhSt
hoom
The-thing-next-door
MiamiMachineShop
marcellogo
Gazputin
Hole
GunshipDemocracy
Labrador
verkhoturye51
kumbor
Rodion_Romanovic
mnztr
Luq man
Tingsay
T-47
DasVivo
Singular_Transform
Benya
miketheterrible
miroslav
walle83
PapaDragon
Isos
Big_Gazza
KomissarBojanchev
SeigSoloyvov
KiloGolf
Ned86
r3mu511
chicken
Rmf
AlfaT8
wilhelm
Dima
kvs
Book.
Mirlo
marat
JohninMK
sepheronx
George1
AyalaBotto
artjomh
franco
zidzu
Vympel
Cucumber Khan
ult
Honesroc
Battalion0415
T055
Mike E
Vann7
magnumcromagnon
Morpheus Eberhardt
navyfield
medo
xeno
Stealthflanker
Deep Throat
zg18
calripson
Austin
Viktor
TR1
TheArmenian
runaway
Cyberspec
GarryB
Robert.V
Admin
Russian Patriot
79 posters
Project 2038.0: Steregushchy Corvette
hoom- Posts : 2352
Points : 2340
Join date : 2016-05-06
Admin- Posts : 2926
Points : 3798
Join date : 2009-07-10
I didn't mention 20385, you did. I was talking about products manufactured by the Kolomna Plant specifically 1DDA12000, 1DRA6000 and 10D49.
hoom- Posts : 2352
Points : 2340
Join date : 2016-05-06
This is the 20380/20385 thread and Gremy just started trials.
Admin- Posts : 2926
Points : 3798
Join date : 2009-07-10
The first ship in trials would be a prototype stage. The fact that it exists is not in question, the reliability of it's engine is.
ult- Posts : 837
Points : 877
Join date : 2015-02-20
Great video. Distance to target - 30km.
Hole- Posts : 11095
Points : 11073
Join date : 2018-03-24
Age : 48
Location : Scholzistan
Bullseye. 
hoom- Posts : 2352
Points : 2340
Join date : 2016-05-06
I would like to see them do a test with a manoeuvring & decoying target with smaller RCS.
These target boats are covered in corner reflectors, too easy IMO.
These target boats are covered in corner reflectors, too easy IMO.
Admin- Posts : 2926
Points : 3798
Join date : 2009-07-10
hoom wrote:I would like to see them do a test with a manoeuvring & decoying target with smaller RCS.
These target boats are covered in corner reflectors, too easy IMO.
It is good to know that they can hit a decommissioned barge. Maybe throw up a chaff cloud at least.
Isos- Posts : 11586
Points : 11554
Join date : 2015-11-06
hoom wrote:I would like to see them do a test with a manoeuvring & decoying target with smaller RCS.
These target boats are covered in corner reflectors, too easy IMO.
US tests, the one that are shown like this one, are also against similar targets full of containers on them. They are made for peopanganda means.
Real tests are secret for any weapon.
I don't know, Afbanistan could be in your future. Take a time out to think about it.
He was sarcastic. He was trolling pro russians in this forum, not you.
hoom- Posts : 2352
Points : 2340
Join date : 2016-05-06
More 20385
Apparently the current state of 2nd 20385
Apparently the current state of 2nd 20385
Hole- Posts : 11095
Points : 11073
Join date : 2018-03-24
Age : 48
Location : Scholzistan
Looks like it will leave the building hall soon. Now it´s time to order the next 2 (or 4?).
Rodion_Romanovic- Posts : 2633
Points : 2802
Join date : 2015-12-30
Location : Merkelland
do they plan to continue with this class? I thought they were building them only because they had difficulties in building frigates...Hole wrote:Looks like it will leave the building hall soon. Now it´s time to order the next 2 (or 4?).
I would prefer to see severnata verf busy with additional gorshkov class.
Hole- Posts : 11095
Points : 11073
Join date : 2018-03-24
Age : 48
Location : Scholzistan
First the wanted at least four, after 2014 the Navy reduced the order to two because of some issues with equipment and the price tag. After the outfitting of the first ship started, some official stated that they wanted another two.
The whole class has nothing to do with the building of frigates. These are coastal defence ships (traditional classification). They are needed in the small seas (Baltic, Black Sea and so on) around Russia.
The whole class has nothing to do with the building of frigates. These are coastal defence ships (traditional classification). They are needed in the small seas (Baltic, Black Sea and so on) around Russia.
Rodion_Romanovic- Posts : 2633
Points : 2802
Join date : 2015-12-30
Location : Merkelland
Hole wrote:First the wanted at least four, after 2014 the Navy reduced the order to two because of some issues with equipment and the price tag. After the outfitting of the first ship started, some official stated that they wanted another two.
The whole class has nothing to do with the building of frigates. These are coastal defence ships (traditional classification). They are needed in the small seas (Baltic, Black Sea and so on) around Russia.
They are quite large and expensive for being corvettes and while being quite capable for their size(sharing also.some.of the equipment with the larger frigates), building them subtracts resources and space needed for larger ships (expecially if built at the same shipyard that is currently building gorshkov class)
Anyway, the first two will not go to Baltic or Black sea, but to the Pacific, because they lack modern ships there.
If they build.the last two.instead in Amur shipyard or in Vladivostok, that would be quite a nice thing.
Gazputin- Posts : 354
Points : 354
Join date : 2019-04-07
isn't the 20386 the interesting boat here ?
the only reason they've cut back 20380/5 to date …. is obviously engine supply issues
but it does seem to me the 20386 has a much larger displacement for a reason …
the 20380/5 are CODAD … that is usually used for patrol type boats
I get the feeling the navy thinks that the 20380/5 (great looking boats yes) are a bit small and cramped for the crews for long patrols ?
especially in deeper waters
also the 20386 has so much innovation in it ….
looks like they will be gas turbine/electric drive ….
it has modular armament re containers for Kalibr or for other customised missions
and it does seem that the entire superstructure will be made from composites …. the exterior at least
interestingly the Russians have started building gas turbine-electric locomotives for the Arctic too …. GTH1-002
very similar drive system idea ….
those locomotives are using gas turbines based on the engines used on the Tu-160 …. no diesels
gas turbine - electric seems the future
I think you guys are almost certainly arguing about dinosaurs ….
I'd go so far as to say that 20386 is the most interesting surface ship in the entire Russian Navy … by a long way
the only reason they've cut back 20380/5 to date …. is obviously engine supply issues
but it does seem to me the 20386 has a much larger displacement for a reason …
the 20380/5 are CODAD … that is usually used for patrol type boats
I get the feeling the navy thinks that the 20380/5 (great looking boats yes) are a bit small and cramped for the crews for long patrols ?
especially in deeper waters
also the 20386 has so much innovation in it ….
looks like they will be gas turbine/electric drive ….
it has modular armament re containers for Kalibr or for other customised missions
and it does seem that the entire superstructure will be made from composites …. the exterior at least
interestingly the Russians have started building gas turbine-electric locomotives for the Arctic too …. GTH1-002
very similar drive system idea ….
those locomotives are using gas turbines based on the engines used on the Tu-160 …. no diesels
gas turbine - electric seems the future
I think you guys are almost certainly arguing about dinosaurs ….
I'd go so far as to say that 20386 is the most interesting surface ship in the entire Russian Navy … by a long way
Gazputin- Posts : 354
Points : 354
Join date : 2019-04-07
I'd go even a bit further on this …
if you look at the layout of the 20386 and the new radically different Ivan Gren landing ship
similar ideas ….. big open flat rear …. probably using the same helicopter lift system ?
probably same container loading in the rear ?
2x gattling guns sitting on the roof of the rear superstructure ….
if you extended the front of the new Gren and stuck a gun turret and missile tubes
you got an XXL …. 20386 …. it can't be a coincidence
I'm talking broad concepts here so please don't bore me to tears blathering on "hokums" and other pointless details ….
what we are seeing here is a general layout for the whole Navy ….
even the other patrol boat the Bykov 22160 has a very similar layout ….
I'd say for almost every Navy …. all driven by cost and the need for modularity and flexibility
and electric drive will be used more and more to reduce costs too ….
that 20386 boat is soooo interesting ….
if you look at the layout of the 20386 and the new radically different Ivan Gren landing ship
similar ideas ….. big open flat rear …. probably using the same helicopter lift system ?
probably same container loading in the rear ?
2x gattling guns sitting on the roof of the rear superstructure ….
if you extended the front of the new Gren and stuck a gun turret and missile tubes
you got an XXL …. 20386 …. it can't be a coincidence
I'm talking broad concepts here so please don't bore me to tears blathering on "hokums" and other pointless details ….
what we are seeing here is a general layout for the whole Navy ….
even the other patrol boat the Bykov 22160 has a very similar layout ….
I'd say for almost every Navy …. all driven by cost and the need for modularity and flexibility
and electric drive will be used more and more to reduce costs too ….
that 20386 boat is soooo interesting ….
Tingsay- Posts : 183
Points : 185
Join date : 2016-12-09
Gazputin wrote:
I think you guys are almost certainly arguing about dinosaurs ….
I'd go so far as to say that 20386 is the most interesting surface ship in the entire Russian Navy … by a long way
We've discussed the Derzki a lot before in this forum. People are quite polarized by it. I am like you, I love the ship. It's the most radical ship design by Russia definitely. It's multi-mission bay coincides perfectly with the containerized missiles.
However, it's biggest problem for me is how it fits with what Russia really wants. The obsession with a Blue water Navy (Gorshkov/Gorshkov-Ms and Liders) does not fit 20386.
Russia, I thought, was building a navy that is primarily Green water but with the decent possibility of performing in high seas missions as long as its not an all out war with Nato, which is very very unlikely. Hence the Derkii and Bykov classes and the stalling of Gorshkov-Ms and Liders.
But now, they seem uninterested with Derzkii, and are talking of larger destroyers, which is fine.
I just want them to decide. If they want a frigate-destroyer navy then go for it and scrap the 20380-6. If they want a corvette/frigate navy then go for it and postpone Liders/gorshkov-Ms for now.
GarryB- Posts : 40415
Points : 40915
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
US tests, the one that are shown like this one, are also against similar targets full of containers on them. They are made for peopanganda means.
Real tests are secret for any weapon.
There are plenty of reasons for testing weapons systems on new ships... releasing the video was for propaganda purposes but the test itself might have just been to make sure the systems all work from getting target data to preparing the missile and launching it. The fact that it wasn't near the max range of the missile or at night in high seas storm conditions with jammers and chaff launchers or even Phalanx CIWS operating suggests they were not trying to give the missile itself a real test, they were just making sure this ship can launch missiles.
I remember fairly recently seeing a missile launch failure on a NATO ship that burned for a bit... perhaps they should have tested more, or perhaps their diagnostic systems were faulty, or perhaps they were just unlucky.
Russia, I thought, was building a navy that is primarily Green water but with the decent possibility of performing in high seas missions as long as its not an all out war with Nato, which is very very unlikely. Hence the Derkii and Bykov classes and the stalling of Gorshkov-Ms and Liders.
But now, they seem uninterested with Derzkii, and are talking of larger destroyers, which is fine.
I just want them to decide. If they want a frigate-destroyer navy then go for it and scrap the 20380-6. If they want a corvette/frigate navy then go for it and postpone Liders/gorshkov-Ms for now.
The problem for the Navy is that they need all three... a brown, green, and blue water navy.... (river, coastal, and global).
A blue water navy is the most expensive but to support their international trade interests they will need some sort of international presence.
Having said that in the future their carrier groups wont be anything like US carrier groups... they will probably consist of two or three 20K ton destroyer/cruisers, a carrier and perhaps some long range frigates and subs and support vessels... depending on the mission might include two helicopter carriers and some landing ships in support, but most of the time it will be the equivalent of a Kirov visit was over the last few decades.
Admin- Posts : 2926
Points : 3798
Join date : 2009-07-10
Tingsay wrote:
However, it's biggest problem for me is how it fits with what Russia really wants. The obsession with a Blue water Navy (Gorshkov/Gorshkov-Ms and Liders) does not fit 20386.
Russia, I thought, was building a navy that is primarily Green water but with the decent possibility of performing in high seas missions as long as its not an all out war with Nato, which is very very unlikely. Hence the Derkii and Bykov classes and the stalling of Gorshkov-Ms and Liders.
But now, they seem uninterested with Derzkii, and are talking of larger destroyers, which is fine.
I just want them to decide. If they want a frigate-destroyer navy then go for it and scrap the 20380-6. If they want a corvette/frigate navy then go for it and postpone Liders/gorshkov-Ms for now.
What do you think it is being built for? The 20380 does not have blue water legs so a larger version was made to make it so. That is 20386.
It isn't a matter of what we want, which is a blue water fleet. It is a matter of what we can build with the shitty engines we have. That is 20386.
Tingsay- Posts : 183
Points : 185
Join date : 2016-12-09
GarryB wrote:
The problem for the Navy is that they need all three... a brown, green, and blue water navy.... (river, coastal, and global).
Yes, that is true, But that's at the risk of half-assing the blue and green one at the same time.
Vladimir79 wrote:
What do you think it is being built for? The 20380 does not have blue water legs so a larger version was made to make it so. That is 20386.
It isn't a matter of what we want, which is a blue water fleet. It is a matter of what we can build with the shitty engines we have. That is 20386.
Yes 20386 has true blue water ability, that is it's defining feature. But it still not the most optimal for it. This thing costs almost as much as a Grigorovich and way more expensive than 20380s, which quite a fail actually.
The idea behind 20386 is gonna be a fail too, if not procured in large numbers. And they only ordered one.
If the problem is shitty engines and they want a blue water navy, scrap Derzkii then. Use the money to be spent on them for Gorshkovs, -Ms.
Whatever they want, they should just go for it. Engines gonna be a problem regardless.
Admin- Posts : 2926
Points : 3798
Join date : 2009-07-10
Tingsay wrote:
We've discussed the Derzki a lot before in this forum. People are quite polarized by it. I am like you, I love the ship. It's the most radical ship design by Russia definitely. It's multi-mission bay coincides perfectly with the containerized missiles.
However, it's biggest problem for me is how it fits with what Russia really wants. The obsession with a Blue water Navy (Gorshkov/Gorshkov-Ms and Liders) does not fit 20386.
Russia, I thought, was building a navy that is primarily Green water but with the decent possibility of performing in high seas missions as long as its not an all out war with Nato, which is very very unlikely. Hence the Derkii and Bykov classes and the stalling of Gorshkov-Ms and Liders.
But now, they seem uninterested with Derzkii, and are talking of larger destroyers, which is fine.
I just want them to decide. If they want a frigate-destroyer navy then go for it and scrap the 20380-6. If they want a corvette/frigate navy then go for it and postpone Liders/gorshkov-Ms for now.
Well again, it comes down to engines. Grigorovitch is the most economical option for blue water at 10 billion, the same cost as 20380. But it doesn't have engines which is the same situation as Gorshkov at 16 billion. 20386 is the biggest thing we can build with shitty but procurable engines. They can talk of nuclear destroyers until they are blue in the face, money must be allocated first.
Tingsay- Posts : 183
Points : 185
Join date : 2016-12-09
Vladimir79 wrote:
Well again, it comes down to engines. Grigorovitch is the most economical option for blue water at 10 billion, the same cost as 20380. But it doesn't have engines which is the same situation as Gorshkov at 16 billion. 20386 is the biggest thing we can build with shitty but procurable engines. They can talk of nuclear destroyers until they are blue in the face, money must be allocated first.
My stance on the Russian navy has always been simple. They just need to go for a corvette/frigate navy and worry about destroyers in the 2030s.
Im not totally against starting a frigate/destroyer navy now, they just need to fully commit to it (at the expense of 20380-6 and possibly karakurts).
If it really all boils down to engines, then that's just one more reason on top of many to commit to a corvette/frigate surface fleet. This is why I like the Derzkii, it's a ship that will spend most of its time as a corvette but can masquerade as an open ocean warship and do decent, not optimal, decent. It's not that the ship itself is genius, it's that considering where the Russian Navy is right now, it is a brilliant ship.
Its sounds funny, but russia can actually get away with a half-assed blue navy. Aside from the unlikelihood of a full blown war with Nato, The hot zones it's currently involved in (Ukraine, Syria) and future possible ones (Kuril, Baltic) is right in the blurred lines between green and blue waters. The Derzkii is absolutely perfect here.
But then, they only layed down one so
The Russian Navy is as confused they were 10 years ago
Gazputin- Posts : 354
Points : 354
Join date : 2019-04-07
I really think …. they have got their heads together
Russia needs a "blu-ish" navy … for "warm" waters
what colonies or bases do they have to support ?
…. Syria …. and that is obviously to do with grain exports from the Black Sea …. a big issue
20386 … perfect …. biggish Gren …. prefect …. why go bigger ?
to me …. problem solved …. stick the 20386 drive system into a Gren version …. too easy
to me Gren descendants and 20386 descendants …. common core ...
next … the Arctic
I think the 20386 will evolve to a bigger Frigate/Destroyer …. non-nuke
nobody in their right mind would built a nuke destroyer …..
you'd build a nuke "cruiser sub" any day ….
to me all "nukes" underwater ….
I think the Russians have it "bang on"
the Arctic ….
…. its ice
should our "other" fleet be "Arctic capable"
to me its a no-brainer …. yes
my heli-carrier …. ice capable
20386 big brother " … ice capable ….
once again … common core ...
no doubt to me …. Russia next "heli-carrier" will be built in a shipyard used to building ice-breakers
and will be minimum 200m long … and 20386 big brother …. maybe even a common platform ?
that's where I'd be going …. its a no-brainer
Yantar will do warm water navy …. probably St.P'burg will do ice navy …
despite all the criticism … I see a very very smart plan ….
these guys are so pragmatic ….
Russia needs a "blu-ish" navy … for "warm" waters
what colonies or bases do they have to support ?
…. Syria …. and that is obviously to do with grain exports from the Black Sea …. a big issue
20386 … perfect …. biggish Gren …. prefect …. why go bigger ?
to me …. problem solved …. stick the 20386 drive system into a Gren version …. too easy
to me Gren descendants and 20386 descendants …. common core ...
next … the Arctic
I think the 20386 will evolve to a bigger Frigate/Destroyer …. non-nuke
nobody in their right mind would built a nuke destroyer …..
you'd build a nuke "cruiser sub" any day ….
to me all "nukes" underwater ….
I think the Russians have it "bang on"
the Arctic ….
…. its ice
should our "other" fleet be "Arctic capable"
to me its a no-brainer …. yes
my heli-carrier …. ice capable
20386 big brother " … ice capable ….
once again … common core ...
no doubt to me …. Russia next "heli-carrier" will be built in a shipyard used to building ice-breakers
and will be minimum 200m long … and 20386 big brother …. maybe even a common platform ?
that's where I'd be going …. its a no-brainer
Yantar will do warm water navy …. probably St.P'burg will do ice navy …
despite all the criticism … I see a very very smart plan ….
these guys are so pragmatic ….
Rodion_Romanovic- Posts : 2633
Points : 2802
Join date : 2015-12-30
Location : Merkelland
Vladimir79 wrote:
Well again, it comes down to engines. Grigorovitch is the most economical option for blue water at 10 billion, the same cost as 20380. But it doesn't have engines which is the same situation as Gorshkov at 16 billion. 20386 is the biggest thing we can build with shitty but procurable engines. They can talk of nuclear destroyers until they are blue in the face, money must be allocated first.
20386 will not have shitty but procurable engines, it will have the same gas turbine as gorshkov and electric engines. I believe it is the first time of a so advanced propulsion integration for Russia.
Maybe you meant 20385, that were supposed to have MTU engines but have been retrofitted with Russian Kolumna engines because of the sanctions.
marcellogo- Posts : 674
Points : 680
Join date : 2012-08-02
Age : 55
Location : Italy
It seems me that all the discussions about 2038 start from a colossal misjudgement/forgetfullness of the basics of modern naval warfare.
Seems me that the people around here is convinced that a blue water navy would require more sophisticated/armed ships than a green water one.
It just the right contrary
Green water environment is much more dangerous /compelling than blue water one and I wonder how our russian friends seems to have forgotten this essential conceptt.
Just compare the average quantity of weapons carried by a typical Green water Navy (to cut it short: YOUR'S and MINE's own) in theCold War era when compared to the others, Blue and Brown water alike.
There is a reason because ours FREMM cost 30% more than a French one.
The same reasons behind that fact that our and yours naval artillery and CIWS systems are orders of magnitude better than anything else in the world (and Thank to God, they were sold accordingly well).
Our navies, being green water ones really need them to just operate in their own environment, not "just in case".
A blue water ship can see enemy incoming from afar, a blue water ships is usually not alone but it is part of a fully fledged fleet almost always disposed in an optimal formation, a blue water ship in its environment could just be targeted by large and capable systems.
A green water navy has none of this luxuries, menaces pop ups all of a sudden and can be of any type, a pocket submarine, a sea skimming missile launched by a coastal defence system, explosive motor boats coming by a nearby island , even coastal artillery pieces or mine fields.
Even if part of a fleet, they would be engaged in choke points, so no way relying on a system carried on a nearby ships.
Only total suckers in this type of warfare could have developed the colossal fiasco that LCS were, relying on stealth and speed, two things almost useless in such an environment or better said in the tactical posture that green water is.
Blue water ships need just a thing: larger tonnage for fuel, weapons depots and crew accomodation.
Green water ones needs an hundred of things more.
Seems me that the people around here is convinced that a blue water navy would require more sophisticated/armed ships than a green water one.
It just the right contrary
Green water environment is much more dangerous /compelling than blue water one and I wonder how our russian friends seems to have forgotten this essential conceptt.
Just compare the average quantity of weapons carried by a typical Green water Navy (to cut it short: YOUR'S and MINE's own) in theCold War era when compared to the others, Blue and Brown water alike.
There is a reason because ours FREMM cost 30% more than a French one.
The same reasons behind that fact that our and yours naval artillery and CIWS systems are orders of magnitude better than anything else in the world (and Thank to God, they were sold accordingly well).
Our navies, being green water ones really need them to just operate in their own environment, not "just in case".
A blue water ship can see enemy incoming from afar, a blue water ships is usually not alone but it is part of a fully fledged fleet almost always disposed in an optimal formation, a blue water ship in its environment could just be targeted by large and capable systems.
A green water navy has none of this luxuries, menaces pop ups all of a sudden and can be of any type, a pocket submarine, a sea skimming missile launched by a coastal defence system, explosive motor boats coming by a nearby island , even coastal artillery pieces or mine fields.
Even if part of a fleet, they would be engaged in choke points, so no way relying on a system carried on a nearby ships.
Only total suckers in this type of warfare could have developed the colossal fiasco that LCS were, relying on stealth and speed, two things almost useless in such an environment or better said in the tactical posture that green water is.
Blue water ships need just a thing: larger tonnage for fuel, weapons depots and crew accomodation.
Green water ones needs an hundred of things more.
|
|
|