Project 20836 Derzkiy-class modular Corvette

Okay, first ship of series Project 20836 "Derzkiy" (bold, daring - eng.) will be laid down on Oct. 28 

They are really building 20836? Awesome!!!

And I'm lovin' the name. I think closer translation would be arrogant/petulant which is even cooler.

zg18 wrote:Okay, first ship of series Project 20836 "Derzkiy" (bold, daring - eng.) will be laid down on Oct. 28 

What the hell, granted it looks good, but where's the Paket, Kashtan, are those UKSKs or Shtil vls and what's behind the AK-630s an APS??

AlfaT8 wrote:

zg18 wrote:Okay, first ship of series Project 20836 "Derzkiy" (bold, daring - eng.) will be laid down on Oct. 28 

What the hell, granted it looks good, but where's the Paket, Kashtan, are those UKSKs or Shtil vls and what's behind the AK-630s an APS??

This class of vessels are built with modular approach in mind, each ship will be equipped & armed in accordance with mission, and role of missions/tasks can change.

AlfaT8 wrote:

zg18 wrote:Okay, first ship of series Project 20836 "Derzkiy" (bold, daring - eng.) will be laid down on Oct. 28 

.....

What the hell, granted it looks good, but where's the Paket, Kashtan, are those UKSKs or Shtil vls and what's behind the AK-630s an APS??

This is image of export version. RU Navy will be getting full variant but they still haven't shown it. But it will definitely be jacked.

Remember Karakurts? Original images were also for export version and they had Gibka SAMs. But RN version ended up having naval Pantsir instead.

SeigSoloyvov wrote:They don't even have the 20380 series done yet though is that really wise. (some would argue the 20380 are wastes of money doesn't it just require the redoubt missiles?)

Project 20380 "corvettes" are well underestimated ships. I purposely say "corvettes", because they are in fact light frigates by its fire power, just called corvette for political reasons.
They have powerful anti-aircraft missiles system installed (for example better than Udaloy class, which is consider as Destroyer), as well as Uran missile system which is equivalent to the NATO Harpoon missile, being installed on most NATO ships as main anti-ship weapons.
Also they have powerful anti-submarine capability too, with PAKET system installed.

If you compare Project 20380 ships with for example French La Fayette class frigates, you gonna see that Project 20380 is much better ship, because La Fayette miss anti-aircraft missile systems and anti submarine weapons. Still La Fayette is consider modern frigate.

They build 5 of them by now with another 5 being built plus 2 more Project 20385 with Kalibr missile systems. As far as I remember they originally planed 12 of these ships.

SeigSoloyvov wrote:They don't even have the 20380 series done yet though is that really wise. (some would argue the 20380 are wastes of money doesn't it just require the redoubt missiles?)

Well more Light Frigates for the Russian Navy I guess.

20380 was taking forever. Ukrainian engine cock up and their propensity for self combustion was final nail in the coffin. Once local engines finally became available it simply made more sense to start fresh.

There was no benefit to sticking with 20380. In all this time production speed was not improving and technology moved on. And those ships were not up to standard to begin with (short range and endurance).

zg18 wrote:Okay, first ship of series Project 20836 "Derzkiy" (bold, daring - eng.) will be laid down on Oct. 28 

Guys there's something else bothering me about this ship, whats with the lack of radar, or are they built into the ship, like that triangular angled front looking like it's a radar?

Yes, the radars are the squares built into the corners of the superstructure a-la Burkes.
Presumably is the same set that's supposed to be going on 20385.

I'm in the 'but why?' crowd on this.
It doesn't seem to bring anything that 20380/20385 don't bring, has some quite odd design choices.

hoom wrote:Yes, the radars are the squares built into the corners of the superstructure a-la Burkes.
Presumably is the same set that's supposed to be going on 20385.

I'm in the 'but why?' crowd on this.
It doesn't seem to bring anything that 20380/20385 don't bring, has some quite odd design choices.

Right off the bat I would say low radar signature because only thing that matters in war is stealth according to modern western naval doctrine.  

But seriously, 20385 was created because 20380 design was found to be lacking and, like I said already, production speeds were disastrous and not improving even decade later. Range and endurance would be advantage of new design like it was with 20385 over 20380.

But there is a point when upgrading is no longer feasible and starting fresh makes more sense.

Also, we still don't know exact size of this thing but most likely it is slightly bigger than 20380 which brings us to internal arrangement. There are pics around and it is very different to old ones.

Project 20386.

Detailed Pictures from Naval Analyses #twitter:





Also extensive information in this article:
https://thaimilitaryandasianregion.wordpress.com/2016/07/01/project-20386-small-patrol-ships-corvettes/

hoom wrote:Yes, the radars are the squares built into the corners of the superstructure a-la Burkes.
Presumably is the same set that's supposed to be going on 20385.

I'm in the 'but why?' crowd on this.
It doesn't seem to bring anything that 20380/20385 don't bring, has some quite odd design choices.

From the photos:

1. It has a lower radar signature (as Papadragon said)
2. It has better internal arrangements (as the dragon said as well)
3. It has everything that 20380 has plus Kalibr
4. It has better speed boat launching abilities (for special operations)
5. It has newer generation radar and other electronics
6. It is probably easier to build
7. It looks less top heavy (with helicopter and other heavy stuff like torpedoes moved lower), hence better seaworthiness

TheArmenian wrote:

hoom wrote:Yes, the radars are the squares built into the corners of the superstructure a-la Burkes.
Presumably is the same set that's supposed to be going on 20385.

I'm in the 'but why?' crowd on this.
It doesn't seem to bring anything that 20380/20385 don't bring, has some quite odd design choices.

From the photos:

1. It has a lower radar signature (as Papadragon said)
2. It has better internal arrangements (as the dragon said as well)
3. It has everything that 20380 has plus Kalibr
4. It has better speed boat launching abilities (for special operations)
5. It has newer generation radar and other electronics
6. It is probably easier to build
7. It looks less top heavy (with helicopter and other heavy stuff like torpedoes moved lower), hence better seaworthiness

1) but no 8xKh35 and 8 Kalibrs? or I am wrong?

2) why but why again 100mm if Russia  already is using 76mm and 57mm on light ships?

3) so no navalized Pantsir foreseen?

GunshipDemocracy wrote:...............
1) but no 8xKh35 and 8 Kalibrs? or I am wrong?

We don't know. This ''hole'' for AShMs is pretty deep, they could perhaps fit UKSK there or maybe put Redut there and install UKSK in the front:

GunshipDemocracy wrote:2) why but why again 100mm if Russia  already is using 76mm and 57mm on light ships?

100mm is overkill for this class. It also takes a lot of weight.

GunshipDemocracy wrote:3) so no navalized Pantsir foreseen?

Again, we don't know but twin Palash should be enough.

This image is for export version.

Look carefully. Project 20386 has:

.Redut up-front (in front of gun)
.Kh-35 amid ship
.Kalibr containers in the rear

TheArmenian wrote:Look carefully. Project 20386 has:

.Redut up-front (in front of gun)
.Kh-35 amid ship
.Kalibr containers in the rear

I know that. But not having UKSK launchers on ships being built today is frankly idiotic. 20830 was ditched in part because of that. And I still think that ship that will be laid down will have totally different armament than one in the picture.

When you launch missile from container you first have to open deck hatches, erect launcher from container, open launcher covers and then launch. Idiotic waste of time when in modern naval combat every second counts. And UKSK carries 8 missiles, cargo container only 4. Also, since it shares space with helicopter, readiness is reduced even further.

Launching from containers makes sense for LACMs because time is less of an issue, but not for AShMs.

Only way setup with Kh-35 would make sense is if Navy expects to develop supersonic version of that missile (range of Uran is still half that of Onix) or if primary purpose of this class is anti-sub warfare (which defeats the whole point of investing in ''multirole vessel'').

PapaDragon wrote:

TheArmenian wrote:Look carefully. Project 20386 has:

.Redut up-front (in front of gun)
.Kh-35 amid ship
.Kalibr containers in the rear

I know that. But not having UKSK launchers on ships being built today is frankly idiotic. 20830 was ditched in part because of that. And I still think that ship that will be laid down will have totally different armament than one in the picture.

When you launch missile from container you first have to open deck hatches, erect launcher from container, open launcher covers and then launch. Idiotic waste of time when in modern naval combat every second counts. And UKSK carries 8 missiles, cargo container only 4. Also, since it shares space with helicopter, readiness is reduced even further.

Launching from containers makes sense for LACMs because time is less of an issue, but not for AShMs.

Only way setup with Kh-35 would make sense is if Navy expects to develop supersonic version of that missile (range of Uran is still half that of Onix) or if primary purpose of this class is anti-sub warfare (which defeats the whole point of investing in ''multirole vessel'').

Indeed,
Project 20380 corvettes (small frigates really) are multipurpose ships with an emphasis on anti-submarine warfare (helicopter + Packet + large sonar).
Project 20385 version has an emphasis on anti-ship warfare. That is done by replacing the Kh-35 launchers with Onyx carrying UKSKs. They are intended for the North Sea Fleet.
Project 20386 goes back to anti-submarine emphasis but adds land-attack capability with Kalibr.

Nothing wrong with having multipurpose design, especially if you are operating on a tight budget. It is also quite possible that you are right and the 20386 will end up having UKSKs instead of Kh-35.

The Kh-35 is no slouch, the range of the latest version is 270 km. Quite sufficient for the Baltic. Note that the coastal batteries are still acquiring the Kh-35 based BAL system together with the Onyx based BASTION system.

The main ship killers of the Baltic Fleet will be the Karakurt class boats and the Buyans (two of which are sailing there as we speak).

TheArmenian wrote:

PapaDragon wrote:

TheArmenian wrote:Look carefully. Project 20386 has:

.Redut up-front (in front of gun)
.Kh-35 amid ship
.Kalibr containers in the rear

I know that. But not having UKSK launchers on ships being built today is frankly idiotic. 20830 was ditched in part because of that. And I still think that ship that will be laid down will have totally different armament than one in the picture.

When you launch missile from container you first have to open deck hatches, erect launcher from container, open launcher covers and then launch. Idiotic waste of time when in modern naval combat every second counts. And UKSK carries 8 missiles, cargo container only 4. Also, since it shares space with helicopter, readiness is reduced even further.

Launching from containers makes sense for LACMs because time is less of an issue, but not for AShMs.

Only way setup with Kh-35 would make sense is if Navy expects to develop supersonic version of that missile (range of Uran is still half that of Onix) or if primary purpose of this class is anti-sub warfare (which defeats the whole point of investing in ''multirole vessel'').

Indeed,
Project 20380 corvettes (small frigates really) are multipurpose ships with an emphasis on anti-submarine warfare (helicopter + Packet + large sonar).
Project 20385 version has an emphasis on anti-ship warfare. That is done by replacing the Kh-35 launchers with Onyx carrying UKSKs. They are intended for the North Sea Fleet.
Project 20386 goes back to anti-submarine emphasis but adds land-attack capability with Kalibr.

Nothing wrong with having multipurpose design, especially if you are operating on a tight budget. It is also quite possible that you are right and the 20386 will end up having UKSKs instead of Kh-35.

The Kh-35 is no slouch, the range of the latest version is 270 km. Quite sufficient for the Baltic. Note that the coastal batteries are still acquiring the Kh-35 based BAL system together with the Onyx based BASTION system.

The main ship killers of the Baltic Fleet will be the Karakurt class boats and the Buyans (two of which are sailing there as we speak).

I am gonna have to go with PD on this one, the entire point of the current naval modernization program is "multirole" vessels and the UKSK is the fundamental cornerstone of the entire thing, to create a ship of this class without it is simply unacceptable, hopefully this won't be the case for domestic vessels.

GarryB wrote:

2) why but why again 100mm if Russia  already is using 76mm and 57mm on light ships?

100mm guns offer far more in terms of range and effect on target and are useful against a much wider range of targets than any 76mm gun.

In terms of ammo you can have a much wider variety of rounds for the larger calibre... including EMP rounds and guided rounds and air burst rounds to defeat incoming Anti ship missiles and other threats.

An EMP round would be a useful way of dealing with a large number of incoming subsonic anti ship missiles for instance.

Never heard about EMP round but rate of fire is for 76mm  - 130 and for 100mm 80. For CIWS role IMHO better is 76mm. Besides 3 calibers isnt best solution for logistics I presume.



[quote="PapaDragon"]

GunshipDemocracy wrote:...............

GunshipDemocracy wrote:2) why but why again 100mm if Russia  already is using 76mm and 57mm on light ships?

100mm is overkill for this class. It also takes a lot of weight.

fully agree with this

PapaDragon wrote:

GunshipDemocracy wrote:3) so no navalized Pantsir foreseen?

Again, we don't know but twin Palash should be enough.

This image is for export version.

Well if this is true that new Pantisr is gonna have 40km range then redut launcher for small ships makes not much sense to me.
I do not think Palash will be used anymore once Pantsir enters production.

Via Balancers forum Dersky laid down (should this stuff be in 20380 thread?)


Reduced to a single AK630 & with even worse traverse
No place to add/retrofit Pantsir-M.

Has anyone seen the AA missile system named?
The lack of specifying Redut or Stihl-1 (or other? Naval Tor?) is pretty odd I feel.

GunshipDemocracy wrote:
Well if this is true that new Pantisr is gonna have 40km range then redut launcher for small ships makes not much sense to me.
I do not think Palash will be used anymore once Pantsir enters production.

Apples and oranges. Pantsir is SHORAD, Palash is dedicated CIWS.

hoom wrote:Via Balancers forum Dersky laid down (should this stuff be in 20380 thread?)
.........

Reduced to a single AK630 & with even worse traverse
No place to add/retrofit Pantsir-M.

Has anyone seen the AA missile system named?
The lack of specifying Redut or Stihl-1 (or other? Naval Tor?) is pretty odd I feel.

Wow, this thing better be super cheap and fast to build because, as it stands now, it's super weak...

Although in all honesty it is just one CIWS less than 20380 so maybe they are just tweaking that model?

PapaDragon wrote:

GunshipDemocracy wrote:
Well if this is true that new Pantisr is gonna have 40km range then redut launcher for small ships makes not much sense to me.
I do not think Palash will be used anymore once Pantsir enters production.

Apples and oranges. Pantsir is SHORAD, Palash is dedicated CIWS.

hoom wrote:Via Balancers forum Dersky laid down (should this stuff be in 20380 thread?)
.........

Reduced to a single AK630 & with even worse traverse
No place to add/retrofit Pantsir-M.

Has anyone seen the AA missile system named?
The lack of specifying Redut or Stihl-1 (or other? Naval Tor?) is pretty odd I feel.

Wow, this thing better be super cheap and fast to build because, as it stands now, it's super weak...

Although in all honesty it is just one CIWS less than 20380 so maybe they are just tweaking that model?

It's got to be, we can only hope they up-gun it later down the line, because as it is now i can only see it serving as a decent air defense corvette (if the Redut claims are true).

On a further note, who the hell puts the missile in front of the main gun, in all seriousness, what the hell?

A look at the new 20386 Corvettes;

https://thaimilitaryandasianregion.wordpress.com/2016/07/01/project-20386-small-patrol-ships-corvettes/

According to this article 16 Redut SAM, 8 Uran ShSM and 8 Club-K ShSM or SSM missiles. And size wise at 3500 t, is almost as big as the 11356 and only 1000 t less then the 22350. If so explains the lack of further orders for the 22350 and not bothering to finish the 11356 with Russian engines.