Home
Latest images
Register
Log in+65
Podlodka77
Krepost
Arrow
Mir
ALAMO
Dorfmeister
lancelot
Yugo90
gbu48098
The_Observer
magnumcromagnon
owais.usmani
TMA1
LMFS
Begome
franco
JohninMK
wilhelm
mnztr
TheArmenian
flamming_python
dino00
medo
Rodion_Romanovic
william.boutros
DerWolf
ATLASCUB
Tsavo Lion
kvs
GarryB
southpark
The-thing-next-door
zardof
bolshevik345
higurashihougi
verkhoturye51
Labrador
hoom
Stealthflanker
AlfaT8
Hole
Ned86
walle83
Peŕrier
Big_Gazza
miroslav
SeigSoloyvov
T-47
KiloGolf
Luq man
Rowdyhorse4
Benya
Mirlo
nastle77
Isos
PapaDragon
George1
Dima
max steel
artjomh
dionis
KomissarBojanchev
Austin
TR1
Admin
69 posters
Udaloy and Sovremennyy destroyers
Arrow
Arrow- Posts : 3410
Points : 3400
Join date : 2012-02-12
George1, Big_Gazza, ALAMO, Hole and lancelot like this post
Krepost- Posts : 780
Points : 782
Join date : 2021-12-08
Longer video.
Shows the recently mounted pedestals for (what is believed) the Kh-35 URAN missiles.
It is now almost certain that Adm. Chabanenko will carry 16 missiles ( 4 x quad mounts).
Anything else about other weapon modification is pure speculation at this stage.
The pedestals for Kh-35 URAN in place of the MOSKITs.
Shows the recently mounted pedestals for (what is believed) the Kh-35 URAN missiles.
It is now almost certain that Adm. Chabanenko will carry 16 missiles ( 4 x quad mounts).
Anything else about other weapon modification is pure speculation at this stage.
The pedestals for Kh-35 URAN in place of the MOSKITs.
GarryB, franco, medo, George1, Big_Gazza, PapaDragon and LMFS like this post
Big_Gazza- Posts : 4851
Points : 4841
Join date : 2014-08-25
Location : Melbourne, Australia
That looks hugely over-engineered for Kh-35, but what you might expect for inclined Oniks/Zircon launchers?
Yes, I know, the conventional wisdom is that Russia isn't going the Chinese route of retro-fitting new AShMs to inclined launch tubes, but they have developed the tech and trialled it so it's at least plausible.
If I wanted to speculate (
) I'd guess that maybe the Navy has finally decided that 1151.1 Chabanenko will be designated as an anti-surface vessel and won't be fitted with UKSK, probably as unlike 1155 Shaposhnikov she doesn't have the 2nd 100mm arty that can be sacrificed, so the internal mods required will be too extensive and too expensive. She gets slanted launchers instead (4x quad packs?), and won't be carrying Otvet like her 1155 sisters.
1155M carrying mostly Otvet in the vertical tubes as their primary weapon (no secondary anti-surface capability?) explains why they fitted Kh-35s. 11551M won't need them.
Chabanenko ends up as a Russian analogue of the Chinese 956s, albeit with an excellent bow sonar array, towed array, 2x helo and extra 533mm torps. Excellent anti-surface, excellent ASW hunting, middling ASW offense (lacking long range attack) and only self-defense AA
Speculation is fun but time will tell...
Yes, I know, the conventional wisdom is that Russia isn't going the Chinese route of retro-fitting new AShMs to inclined launch tubes, but they have developed the tech and trialled it so it's at least plausible.
If I wanted to speculate (
) I'd guess that maybe the Navy has finally decided that 1151.1 Chabanenko will be designated as an anti-surface vessel and won't be fitted with UKSK, probably as unlike 1155 Shaposhnikov she doesn't have the 2nd 100mm arty that can be sacrificed, so the internal mods required will be too extensive and too expensive. She gets slanted launchers instead (4x quad packs?), and won't be carrying Otvet like her 1155 sisters.1155M carrying mostly Otvet in the vertical tubes as their primary weapon (no secondary anti-surface capability?) explains why they fitted Kh-35s. 11551M won't need them.
Chabanenko ends up as a Russian analogue of the Chinese 956s, albeit with an excellent bow sonar array, towed array, 2x helo and extra 533mm torps. Excellent anti-surface, excellent ASW hunting, middling ASW offense (lacking long range attack) and only self-defense AA
Speculation is fun but time will tell...
Isos- Posts : 11589
Points : 11557
Join date : 2015-11-06
Yes, I know, the conventional wisdom is that Russia isn't going the Chinese route of retro-fitting new AShMs to inclined launch tubes, but they have developed the tech and trialled it so it's at least plausible.
Well Udaloy are not designed with UKSK in mind so if they want to have a decent number of missiles they will need to use angled UKSK.
Kh-35 is fine but very limited.
The two UKSK they use will for sure carry ASW missile torpedoes because the Udaloy are meant for anti sub warfare.
So if they want to use it for antiship/land attack too, they need to use more UKSK. Only place left is angled them where kh-35 is.
lancelot likes this post
GarryB- Posts : 40438
Points : 40938
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
I don't think they are expecting it to be the same as it was... ie I think they are expecting it to more be a long endurance multirole frigate... in which case two UKSK launchers means 16 missiles, and with four angled launchers for URAN, that would be 16 anti ship missiles.
This means they could go for a mixture of weapons... the 16 URANs are anti ship but are also land attack capable and with another 16 tubes it could therefore carry 32 anti ship or 32 land attack or 16 anti sub and 16 land attack or anti ship missiles.
For all we know the angled missile mounts might be Medvedka ballistic rockets for anti sub use too.
I suspect these vessels will be used as larger heavier frigates with better endurance and more comfort for longer range operations away from Russian waters, for which a variety of weapons would likely be considered useful.
I mean we go on about hundreds of SAMs and enormous numbers of this or that missile, but realistically in peace time how many would it normally need to actually carry?
If it could sink four submarines with 16 missiles then it is doing very very well... it also has a helicopter or two so its ability to engage Somali pirates should be excellent...
Often a burst of 30mm cannon fire or 100mm main gun calibre shots will do.
This means they could go for a mixture of weapons... the 16 URANs are anti ship but are also land attack capable and with another 16 tubes it could therefore carry 32 anti ship or 32 land attack or 16 anti sub and 16 land attack or anti ship missiles.
For all we know the angled missile mounts might be Medvedka ballistic rockets for anti sub use too.
I suspect these vessels will be used as larger heavier frigates with better endurance and more comfort for longer range operations away from Russian waters, for which a variety of weapons would likely be considered useful.
I mean we go on about hundreds of SAMs and enormous numbers of this or that missile, but realistically in peace time how many would it normally need to actually carry?
If it could sink four submarines with 16 missiles then it is doing very very well... it also has a helicopter or two so its ability to engage Somali pirates should be excellent...
Often a burst of 30mm cannon fire or 100mm main gun calibre shots will do.
Mir- Posts : 3763
Points : 3761
Join date : 2021-06-10
For all we know the angled missile mounts might be Medvedka ballistic rockets for anti sub use too.
Medvedka is meant for small size patrol craft and has a range of about 20kms. Big_Gazza's theory makes more sense to me as the Udaloys are principle ships. Let's hope for a few surprises on the Chabanenko!
GarryB- Posts : 40438
Points : 40938
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
They are designating them as frigates... if it was doing what it did before wouldn't it be an anti sub destroyer?
Medvedka is compact angled vertical launch tubes intended to not take up too much deck space, which makes them the anti sub equivalent of Uran.
Uran was also intended for exported light ships too... I seem to remember the first ones operational were put on an East German small patrol boat.
Medvedka is compact angled vertical launch tubes intended to not take up too much deck space, which makes them the anti sub equivalent of Uran.
Uran was also intended for exported light ships too... I seem to remember the first ones operational were put on an East German small patrol boat.
Mir- Posts : 3763
Points : 3761
Join date : 2021-06-10
GarryB wrote:They are designating them as frigates... if it was doing what it did before wouldn't it be an anti sub destroyer?
Medvedka is compact angled vertical launch tubes intended to not take up too much deck space, which makes them the anti sub equivalent of Uran.
Uran was also intended for exported light ships too... I seem to remember the first ones operational were put on an East German small patrol boat.
The Metel ASW missile was installed on all the Soviet era ASW orientated ships from the Krivak frigates, the Kresta2 and Kara Cruisers and even the original Kirov battle cruisers. These were all regarded as principal ships by the Soviet Navy. The "downgraded" Udaloy frigates are still considered to be princpal ships and will be armed as such.
The original Medvedka ASW missile was not widely adopted by the Soviet/Russian Navy - mainly due to the fall of the USSR and the terrible 90's, but it was intended for small patrol boats with limited displacement of around 350 tons. The Pr.p1141/11451 hydrofoils were used as test beds for the missile.
There is talk of a Medvedka 2 missile but these are intended for launch from the UKSK vertical launchers and was supposed to be for the Steregushchy corvettes and the Gorshkov frigates but with the much longer ranged 91R1/2 missiles things have gone somewhat quiet on the Medvedka 2's.
The Medveka is also offered for export but has nothing in common with the Uran missile. Just an interesting side note - the Uran was installed on the East German Sassnitz boats but was removed and shipped back to the USSR prior to unification.
Big_Gazza- Posts : 4851
Points : 4841
Join date : 2014-08-25
Location : Melbourne, Australia
"Admiral Chabanenko" will be equipped with 32 cruise missiles, a source said
https://ria.ru/20211227/rakety-1765585869.html
If 4Q of 2022 is the target for sea trials then I'll call BS on the UKSK bin, and put that down to incompetent journalism or disinfo by the "source". No way they will cut out a void for a UKSK installation, reconfigure the ships structure, relocate the displaced equipment and run replacement cables, piping/hoses, etc and finish the works inside 9-12 months. IMHO that makes a strong case that they will fit inclined launch tubes for the UKSK-munitions, and locate a pair of quad kh-35 in the space of the original Metel/Rastrubs.
MOSCOW, December 27 - RIA Novosti. The frigate Admiral Chabanenko , on which work is underway at the Nerpa shipyard, will receive 32 cruise missiles - eight more than the recently commissioned frigate Marshal Shaposhnikov, a source in the shipbuilding industry told RIA Novosti.
The frigate Admiral Chabanenko will receive enhanced missile armament - instead of two quad launchers, as on Shaposhnikov, four such launchers will be installed on the ship - a total of 16 Kh-35 cruise missiles. In addition, the frigate will receive a universal launcher vertical launch on 16 cruise missiles "Caliber", "Onyx" or " Zircon ". In total, "Chabanenko" will be able to carry 32 cruise missiles, "- said the agency's interlocutor.
He added that "the ship will be equipped with the latest Pantsir-M maritime anti-aircraft missile and artillery systems (ZRAK), which will replace the Kortik ZRAK." In addition, the frigate will receive new radar stations and other electronic and radio equipment, "added a source.
"The preliminary date for the start of sea trials of the upgraded ship is the fourth quarter of 2022," the agency's interlocutor said.
https://ria.ru/20211227/rakety-1765585869.html
If 4Q of 2022 is the target for sea trials then I'll call BS on the UKSK bin, and put that down to incompetent journalism or disinfo by the "source". No way they will cut out a void for a UKSK installation, reconfigure the ships structure, relocate the displaced equipment and run replacement cables, piping/hoses, etc and finish the works inside 9-12 months. IMHO that makes a strong case that they will fit inclined launch tubes for the UKSK-munitions, and locate a pair of quad kh-35 in the space of the original Metel/Rastrubs.
LMFS likes this post
Isos- Posts : 11589
Points : 11557
Join date : 2015-11-06
Aren't they gonna also put shtil launchers. Only Pantsir would be a very weak AD system. They need a layered IADS.
Mir- Posts : 3763
Points : 3761
Join date : 2021-06-10
Isos wrote:Aren't they gonna also put shtil launchers. Only Pantsir would be a very weak AD system. They need a layered IADS.
That would require huge effort and reconstruction of the Udaloy for something that the Gorshkov and follow-up classes would provide. The Udaloy was never meant to be a multi-purpose ship and to rebuild as such would not be economically feasible for a ship meant to be an interim solution.
Big_Gazza and Broski like this post
Isos- Posts : 11589
Points : 11557
Join date : 2015-11-06
Actually they have shown an official image where they say the future upgrade of Udaloys would integrate the shtil in place of Tor.
ALAMO- Posts : 7439
Points : 7529
Join date : 2014-11-25
Isos wrote:Aren't they gonna also put shtil launchers. Only Pantsir would be a very weak AD system. They need a layered IADS.
Shtil was decided for Winogradow.
It is overall interesting, looks like they are devoted to checking the different configurations of modernization for different vessels.
Here is the Szaposznikow, the first in line :
Here is pending Winogradow :
Now we are hearing, that there will be increased number of missiles for Czabanenko ...
Mir- Posts : 3763
Points : 3761
Join date : 2021-06-10
Isos wrote:Actually they have shown an official image where they say the future upgrade of Udaloys would integrate the shtil in place of Tor.
There were various proposals for heavily modified Udaloys back in the 90's and all of them came to none. I would be surprised to see any of the new Udaloy mods with a Shtil conversion but if it happens I will be very happy!
GarryB and Granger like this post
Big_Gazza- Posts : 4851
Points : 4841
Join date : 2014-08-25
Location : Melbourne, Australia
Isos wrote:Aren't they gonna also put shtil launchers. Only Pantsir would be a very weak AD system. They need a layered IADS.
Chabanenko will have Pantsir-M and TOR. Thats a layered system, albeit short-medium range. They are modernised ships, not modern multi-role. Modest outlays for huge increases in combat performance, great for adding capability to the new fleet of modern frigates and corvettes.
GarryB likes this post
Isos- Posts : 11589
Points : 11557
Join date : 2015-11-06
Big_Gazza wrote:Isos wrote:Aren't they gonna also put shtil launchers. Only Pantsir would be a very weak AD system. They need a layered IADS.
Chabanenko will have Pantsir-M and TOR. Thats a layered system, albeit short-medium range. They are modernised ships, not modern multi-role. Modest outlays for huge increases in combat performance, great for adding capability to the new fleet of modern frigates and corvettes.
You can see above they have worked on a modernization with shtil.
First get upgradef Tor, second shtil, 3rd Pantsir and tor... they seem to be making all of them different.
Mir- Posts : 3763
Points : 3761
Join date : 2021-06-10
Isos wrote:
First get upgradef Tor, second shtil, 3rd Pantsir and tor... they seem to be making all of them different.
That is an indication that these ships are an interim solution but who knows - future upgrades may bring them closer to some sort of standard?
GarryB likes this post
Isos- Posts : 11589
Points : 11557
Join date : 2015-11-06
Mir wrote:Isos wrote:
First get upgradef Tor, second shtil, 3rd Pantsir and tor... they seem to be making all of them different.
That is an indication that these ships are an interim solution but who knows - future upgrades may bring them closer to some sort of standard?
No. They won't upgrade them twice. After this upgrade they will replace them with new ships.
Mir- Posts : 3763
Points : 3761
Join date : 2021-06-10
Isos wrote:
No. They won't upgrade them twice. After this upgrade they will replace them with new ships.
Exactly! But these ships will serve for quite along time to come which will require them to dock for periodic repairs and maintenance. This could even include some mods - as I've said "who knows"?
Isos- Posts : 11589
Points : 11557
Join date : 2015-11-06
Mir wrote:Isos wrote:
No. They won't upgrade them twice. After this upgrade they will replace them with new ships.
Exactly! But these ships will serve for quite along time to come which will require them to dock for periodic repairs and maintenance. This could even include some mods - as I've said "who knows"?
I doubt. They keep them until the production of Gorshkov speeds up. They are old ships. This upgrade should give them another 10 years. But then they will remove them from service once they have enough Gorshkovs.
Broski likes this post
Mir- Posts : 3763
Points : 3761
Join date : 2021-06-10
Isos wrote:
I doubt. They keep them until the production of Gorshkov speeds up. They are old ships. This upgrade should give them another 10 years. But then they will remove them from service once they have enough Gorshkovs.
It's probably a language barrier but I've never stated that they WILL keep on upgrading these ships. There is a big difference between "will" and "may"
I have also said that the Gorshkov's and follow-up classes will provide the necessary air defence for the fleet's ships in the future.
As you said "they will remove them from service once they have enough Gorshkovs" and as I've already indicate these are interim ships.
Isos- Posts : 11589
Points : 11557
Join date : 2015-11-06
Actually you used "will" instead of "may":
"Exactly! But these ships will serve for quite along time to come which will require them to dock for periodic repairs and maintenance. This could even include some mods - as I've said "who knows"?"
"Exactly! But these ships will serve for quite along time to come which will require them to dock for periodic repairs and maintenance. This could even include some mods - as I've said "who knows"?"
Mir- Posts : 3763
Points : 3761
Join date : 2021-06-10
Being "clever" just waists a lot of forum space but yes I've used the word "will" because they "will" serve for a long time to come - that is a fact.
AND like any other ship they "will" require periodic repairs and maintenance - that is a fact.
BUT as far as any future upgrades goes I used the word "may"...
AND like any other ship they "will" require periodic repairs and maintenance - that is a fact.
BUT as far as any future upgrades goes I used the word "may"...
Isos likes this post
GarryB- Posts : 40438
Points : 40938
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
The Metel ASW missile was installed on all the Soviet era ASW orientated ships from the Krivak frigates, the Kresta2 and Kara Cruisers and even the original Kirov battle cruisers. These were all regarded as principal ships by the Soviet Navy. The "downgraded" Udaloy frigates are still considered to be princpal ships and will be armed as such.
I know... it was a big bulky weapon like the Australian Ikara missile, and was replaced in Russia use by torpedo tube launched SS-N-16s and then 91ER1/2.
The Udaloys had Metel, but lost them in this upgrade when UKSK launch tubes were added... there is no point keeping the Metel launchers because they are huge and the missile is obsolete.
The original Medvedka ASW missile was not widely adopted by the Soviet/Russian Navy - mainly due to the fall of the USSR and the terrible 90's, but it was intended for small patrol boats with limited displacement of around 350 tons. The Pr.p1141/11451 hydrofoils were used as test beds for the missile.
I know this... I am saying if it was still to be used as an anti sub ship as its primary role then it would not make sense to fit the big bulky Metel because it is obsolete and takes up too much room.
If its primary use is for anti sub use then Uran is useless... Medvedka is intended for small ships because it is a light and compact missile system intended for smaller vessels.
Uran is a small missile intended for smaller vessels too so essentially I am saying why put a small compact anti ship land attack missile on an anti sub ship... it would make more sense to carry a compact reduced size anti sub weapon that is in service and use.
There is talk of a Medvedka 2 missile but these are intended for launch from the UKSK vertical launchers and was supposed to be for the Steregushchy corvettes and the Gorshkov frigates but with the much longer ranged 91R1/2 missiles things have gone somewhat quiet on the Medvedka 2's.
That would be redundant because existing weapons take up the same space and have better performance already.
The Medveka is also offered for export but has nothing in common with the Uran missile. Just an interesting side note - the Uran was installed on the East German Sassnitz boats but was removed and shipped back to the USSR prior to unification.
It has a sophisticated MMW radar guidance system that is rather difficult to jam or decoy... the west would love to get their hands on one.
They probably got Ukrainian ones already.
IMHO that makes a strong case that they will fit inclined launch tubes for the UKSK-munitions, and locate a pair of quad kh-35 in the space of the original Metel/Rastrubs.
The advantage of vertical launch systems is they are modular... clear the space fit them and attach the wiring... Inclined launch tubes would take up all the space the original quad launch tubes for Metel and more... their length is enormous so you have to build up the deck height and put them in vertically.
Only a Slava class with Vulkan missiles on angled launchers would have the horizontal space for enough UKSK launchers to be useful.
Aren't they gonna also put shtil launchers. Only Pantsir would be a very weak AD system. They need a layered IADS.
It is designated a frigate so it really only has to defend itself so the new model Pantsir and original naval TOR should be plenty for close in protection and out to about 30km with Pantsir...
Shtil would require a major rearrangement and some serious changes.
Actually they have shown an official image where they say the future upgrade of Udaloys would integrate the shtil in place of Tor.
Official from whom? The makers of Shtil might show such an image... there was an official image with angled UKSK launch tubes too but that is not official and AFAIK mainly aimed at export...
Now we are hearing, that there will be increased number of missiles for Czabanenko ...
Mentioned in the article it is just two Uran quad launchers on each side instead of one so 16 Urans total instead of just 8.
Not a huge modification... but certainly easy and sensible.
First get upgradef Tor, second shtil, 3rd Pantsir and tor... they seem to be making all of them different.
These ships are gap fillers till they start making destroyers and get more frigate into service so with the new weapons being modular it would make sense to test some different things... having Shtil is not a bad thing, but is it worth it... who can say without testing and use.
I would think if it was terrible they could change it back in 10 years time during an overhaul or just send it to a backwater where it doesn't matter.
Testing them now on these ships makes more sense than testing them on brand new destroyers...
No. They won't upgrade them twice. After this upgrade they will replace them with new ships.
These ships will be good for a number of years... there is no rush to scrap them... bigger ships are useful until you have enough new ships... and that is going to take a while to get to that position.
I doubt. They keep them until the production of Gorshkov speeds up. They are old ships. This upgrade should give them another 10 years. But then they will remove them from service once they have enough Gorshkovs.
I disagree... these are bigger ships and will have better endurance than the Gorshkovs... when they have a half dozen new destroyers on the water and they want to send them on long trips it would actually make more sense to send these upgraded boats with them than smaller newer boats...
As you said "they will remove them from service once they have enough Gorshkovs" and as I've already indicate these are interim ships
They have no destroyer sized ships and frigate sized ships are useful, but these are destroyer sized vessels and will likely only get scrapped when their destroyers are in proper serial production and in service in reasonable numbers... with two major and two minor fleets and a lake fleet they will need a lot of destroyers in service before these upgraded ships become redundant... they could be sent to the Baltic or Black Sea fleets and could remain there for a couple of decades while new ships fill out the four main fleets.
Mir- Posts : 3763
Points : 3761
Join date : 2021-06-10
The Metel ASW missile was installed on all the Soviet era ASW orientated ships from the Krivak frigates, the Kresta2 and Kara Cruisers and even the original Kirov battle cruisers. These were all regarded as principal ships by the Soviet Navy. The "downgraded" Udaloy frigates are still considered to be princpal ships and will be armed as such.
I know... it was a big bulky weapon like the Australian Ikara missile, and was replaced in Russia use by torpedo tube launched SS-N-16s and then 91ER1/2.
The Udaloys had Metel, but lost them in this upgrade when UKSK launch tubes were added... there is no point keeping the Metel launchers because they are huge and the missile is obsolete.
I am not saying they should keep the Metel launchers at all. I am saying they probably won't use the Medvedka ASW missiles - as you suggested - as they are meant for small patrol boats. Despite being reclassified as frigates, the Udaloy frigates are still considered to be principal ships and will be armed as principal ships. For ASW work they will have the 91RT2 missiles in the UKSK launchers. They can also launch the RPK-6 Vodopad ASW missile from their 533mm torpedo tubes. Together with the two helicopters they will have a formidable long range ASW capability.
If its primary use is for anti sub use then Uran is useless
Fitting them with Uran gives them an additional anti-shipping capability and the new version of the Uran missile has quite a long reach, which is quite something. Being fitted with the UKSK launchers (probably UKSK-M) gives them even more options and can easily use Tsirkon and Oniks missiles if required. But as Big_Gazza suggested those new missile launcher fittings on the Chabanenko could be for something far more sinister!