Project 20836 Derzkiy-class modular Corvette

miketheterrible wrote:Essentially, they sound very unsure on this boat.  That is the reason for all delay.  Engines being a big part of it.

They are unsure?

They are unsure about it now after designing it, ordering it, paying for it, laying it down and two years into construction?

This is the same crowd that (according to some here) will soon build several fleets of nuclear aircraft carriers and destroyers?

I assume first CVN be named ''RS Unsure''?

Losers...

miketheterrible wrote:They should have ordered more of the Grigorovich class frigates instead.  They build those fast and they could simply upgrade it with Redut if really needed.

Same problem as with 20386: engines.

How do you build Grigorevich corvette wen you are ''unsure'' about stinking frigate?

They should have ordered more of the Grigorovich class frigates instead. They build those fast and they could simply upgrade it with Redut if really needed.

I've said that for a long time: finish off the BSF 6* & order another 6* at least nominally for Pacific.

11356 does everything 20386 is supposed to do for similar size/cost and can do it simultaneously vs having to swap in/out containers that may or not exist.

I really don't see Shtil-1 as a disadvantage, same missile is just going into service on Buk-M3.

Only real issue is the engine/gearbox but they're going to need to get that sorted anyway to finish the existing order & it makes much more sense to do it for a bigger order than for just a couple.


Edit: I'd like to also see a bunch more basic 20380 to make sure there are enough modern ASW ships to provide decent coverage/replace old Grishas.
I've been thinking maybe build with Pantsir-M & the 22800 mast instead of Furke-Redut.

hoom wrote:......
Edit: I'd like to also see a bunch more basic 20380 to make sure there are enough modern ASW ships to provide decent coverage/replace old Grishas.
I've been thinking maybe build with Pantsir-M & the 22800 mast instead of Furke-Redut.

Using 20380 as replacment for Grishas is overkill

It would be better, cheaper and quicker to add bow and towed sonar to Bykov-class and arm them with torpedo containers

20380 is for heavier work

No 20380 was going to replace Grishas in the initial plan.
Not 1 for 1 obviously but because of various issues they never came out in the kind of numbers intended.

I should also say it'll be interesting to see how the last few 20380s currently on order turn out, they're supposed to have (at least part of) the Zaslon/Barrier radar system but still 20380 rather than 85/86.
On the one hand Zaslon is pretty expensive & currently still unproven -> risky, on the other hand more ships with it is better for economy of scale & it should let the 9M96es actually work properly.

Important point of 20380 is existing domestic engines are appropriate & in production.

Edit: thanks to the mod who found the proper thread & moved posts

“At the same time, the Northern Shipyard will dock large blocks of the corvette of the project 20386. It will receive its name in honor of the military brig of the Russian fleet Mercury, whose feat will be 190 years old in May,” the minister added.
He clarified that the frigates, landing ships and the frigate "are planned to be incorporated into the Navy until 2025."

https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/6311143

dino00 wrote:“At the same time, the Northern Shipyard will dock large blocks of the corvette of the project 20386. It will receive its name in honor of the military brig of the Russian fleet Mercury, whose feat will be 190 years old in May,” the minister added.
He clarified that the frigates, landing ships and the frigate "are planned to be incorporated into the Navy until 2025."

https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/6311143

I don't get it, what does he mean by "dock large blocks"?

PapaDragon wrote:

dino00 wrote:“At the same time, the Northern Shipyard will dock large blocks of the corvette of the project 20386. It will receive its name in honor of the military brig of the Russian fleet Mercury, whose feat will be 190 years old in May,” the minister added.
He clarified that the frigates, landing ships and the frigate "are planned to be incorporated into the Navy until 2025."

https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/6311143

I don't get it, what does he mean by "dock large blocks"?

I have no clue

From the English version of TASS:

"Alongside this the Northern Shipyard will couple two major hull units of the project 20386 corvette. It will be named after the military brig The Merkuriy, whose heroic feat will turn 190 in May," Shoigu said.

More:
http://tass.com/defense/1052802

Reads to me like too big blocks of a modular ship

Yes reads as joining together blocks.
It would be nice if they're done almost completely fitted out but the pic posted earlier appears to just show typical empty shell.

I think really very little actual construction has been happening, probably waiting on various systems/fniishing parts of the design.


Was just looking up the new namesake https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_brig_Mercury, pretty interesting battle & damn big shoes to fill.

Caught with no wind by two Turkish ships of the line (110 gun & 74 gun!) it (with only 18 guns) refused to surrender, rigged the magazine to blow up & decided to fight to the last, somehow managed to disable both & get away  

Its smaller 12 gun predecessor similarly successfully captured a 44 gun Swedish frigate https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9C%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%BA%D1%83%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%B9_(%D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%B5%D1%80)

Crazy feat indeed!

https://bmpd.livejournal.com/3620778.html


Confirmed empty steel...

A relatively old article (20/03/2019), quite critical about project 20386.

https://topwar.ru/155697-korvet-20386-prodolzhenie-afery.html

It is true that is very expensive, compared to the other projects. Maybe they can use it as a testing platform for new technologies or.concept, so that they will not have delays like the first gorshkov for new ships.

Anyway, we have already discussed in the forum, but the russian navy will probably benefit from a not too expensive corvette optimised for antisub operations.

If it is true what they mention in the article about reduts system needs for radar and other systems, it could be worth instead to put in ships smaller then a frigate (or in upgrades of old ships) either the modernised naval tor or shtil (naval buk) systems, maybe in conjunction with kashtan or pantsir gun/missile system.

In this case they could do a relatively cheaper antisub corvette around 2000 tons based on a simplified 20380/20385 or on an upgraded gepard class since they already mastered the construction of those ship classes.

Or, if they need a bigger endurance for antisub operation they could think again at the grigorovich class (if they can build them with russian engines) which has double the range and endurance compared with 20380 or gepard class.

The indians are building a large asw corvette, but, in order to have a decent endurance, they ended up having a ship with a displacement similar to a grigorovich class and the srmament of a grisha class (it is basically a overgrown grisha class with an helicopter)

Note:
the reason the admiral grigorovic frigates were relatively "cheap" was because they used proven "older" systems and older electronicts, sensors and radars, with less capabilities than the new ones (but not always the best and more expensive system is the ideal, since if pared with relatively short range weapons, it can not use the full potential anyway.

Meh, we've heard all of this before.  Criticism of the lead units of all Russian naval vessels always inflates the cost by lumping the R&D and retooling & design familiarisation costs onto the lead unit.  Subsequent units will be cheaper once the yards are used to the build and get their sht together.

Rodion_Romanovic wrote:...In this case they could do a relatively cheaper antisub corvette around 2000 tons based on a simplified 20380/20385 or on an upgraded gepard class since they already mastered the construction of those ship classes....

If they need cheap and simple ship it's the easiest thing in the world. I can design them a warship that will not cost more than 200k, just don't expect it to be any good

Rodion_Romanovic wrote:...Or, if they need a bigger endurance for antisub operation they could think again at the grigorovich class (if they can build them with russian engines) which has double the range and endurance compared with 20380 or gepard class...

There will never again be Grigorevich-class

It's dead and forgotten

I'd say the much maligned 20386 is trialling stuff for a Super-Gorshkov …

lets be honest here …. in a "real" war …. the subs are Russia's "capital ships"
all these larger surface ships are just glorified patrol ships ….

and all those small missile boats are exactly what I would do …
an "internet" of cruise missile barrage ships …. widely distributed launchers ….

the 20386 makes a lot of sense to me ….
its pretty obvious to anyone with a maritime background
the 20385 ships look nice … are heavily armed
but for the crew …. ????

20386 is not about "weapons" it is about liveability on long patrols
and flexibility ….
but all I read is this crap about "amount of weapons" …..
and seriously …. its not "lightly armed" … I wouldn't mess with it

I've sailed across oceans …. not seen land for weeks/days ….
you have to experience it ….. you go crazy

I think the 20385 looks great …. but is it ?
for the crew ….
if you stuff it full of weapons …. where does the crew go ?
and … how do they stay sane ?

and …. as Western Navies are finding (but not publicising)
how do you crew them …. ?

yep … loads of Western ships can't find crews …. its true
sitting in ports …. no crew

and it will shortly hit Russia
what is the use of building ships ? if nobody will crew them ?

Gazputin wrote:I'd say the much maligned 20386 is trialling stuff for a Super-Gorshkov …

lets be honest here  …. in a "real" war  …. the subs are Russia's "capital ships"
all these larger surface ships are just glorified patrol ships ….

and all those small missile boats are exactly what I would do …
an "internet" of cruise missile barrage ships …. widely distributed launchers  ….

the 20386 makes a lot of sense to me ….
its pretty obvious to anyone with a maritime background
the 20385 ships look nice … are heavily armed
but for the crew …. ????

20386 is not about "weapons" it is about liveability on long patrols
and flexibility ….
but all I read is this crap about "amount of weapons" …..
and seriously …. its not "lightly armed" … I wouldn't mess with it

I've sailed across oceans …. not seen land for weeks/days ….
you have to experience it ….. you go crazy

I think the 20385 looks great …. but is it  ?
for the crew ….
if you stuff it full of weapons …. where does the crew go ?
and  … how do they stay sane ?

and …. as Western Navies are finding (but not publicising)
how do you crew them …. ?

yep … loads of Western ships can't find crews …. its true
sitting in ports …. no crew

and it will shortly hit Russia
what is the use of building ships ? if nobody will crew them ?

OK. But naval ships are not crewed, they are manned and they have complement.

Those are corvettes. Not frigates or destroyers that will cruise a month far away.

Corvettes are sent to patrol the borders for few days when foreign military ships are nearby while coast guard do the work against civilian threats like forbiden fishing. In war time they will go directly on the threats, launch their missiles and go back home.

Radar and C4I means they don't need to patrol huge areas for days before finding enemy ships. Most of the time il-38 or a-50 will spot them in matters of hours.

So the crew living isn't a priority contrary to a gorshkov or a SSBN.

I'd say the much maligned 20386 is trialling stuff for a Super-Gorshkov …

I'd say thats incorrect.

20386 has the same radar suite as 20385, its pretty unlikely that Super-Gorshkov will use the same.
Redut is already in service on a bunch of ships.

There has been no indication that Super-Gorshkov will have container modularity in any way, its been exclusively presented as a major missile cell-count increase over Gorshkov which 20386 in no way contributes towards.

and it will shortly hit Russia
what is the use of building ships ? if nobody will crew them ?

I do wonder how Russia is going with crews, I haven't seen any mention of manning issues in Russian media.

They've put a bunch of new ships in service recently & considerably more active.
More active makes life harder for families -> less attractive for some but it also surely helps somewhat with morale to be serving in a new & active ship compared to old, mostly tied-up rustbuckets.
Possibly at least some crews are made up from crew from old ships going out of service & a lot of the new ships have fairly small crews so it might actually not be a big manning change.

There has been talk about the Army conversion from a primarily conscript army to mainly contract (volunteer, longer service) & that seems to have been going well.
Presumably there has been a similar change in Navy as well?

hoom wrote:

I'd say the much maligned 20386 is trialling stuff for a Super-Gorshkov …

I'd say thats incorrect.

20386 has the same radar suite as 20385, its pretty unlikely that Super-Gorshkov will use the same.
Redut is already in service on a bunch of ships.

There has been no indication that Super-Gorshkov will have container modularity in any way, its been exclusively presented as a major missile cell-count increase over Gorshkov which 20386 in no way contributes towards.

That's quite an amusing claim on your part. Your saying container based systems aren't compatible for it, when all they need is a helicopter pad to be 'compatable' because the container system doesn't require a boat to be modular enough, it was designed to increase the power of already existing ships without a ship needing an upgrade. I've never seen any evidence that a container system could be dropped in to the place of a existing cells, so unless they plan on not having a helicopter/pad than a container system could still be utilized. In fact, we could see micro-feeder dual-use container ships being tugged behind existing warships to significantly increase the fire power of existing ships using the container UKSK and Redut.

Well of course you can stick a container on the heli-pad.

But the claim is that 20386 is testing systems for Super-Gorshkov, have you seen any indication whatsoever that Super-Gorshkov is going to have an elaborate internal container handling system with deck/hull hatches & elevators etc. like 20386?

All they've said about Super-Gorshkov is that it will be about 8000ton and have a lot more missiles.

They will be testing several new technologies, but it is not clear if those will be applied to the destroyers and cruisers currently in plan for the Russian Navy. Maybe something minor, like upgraded life support systems and environmental control systems.

Many of the other innovations are useful for relatively small modular ships, or to add air defence or attack capabilities to an innocent looking ship,

but a proper destroyer must have already all the sensors and armaments in place for antisub, proper antiair layered defence, antiship, land attack cruise missile and even more.

All the technologies and weapon systems for the Gorshkov-M have already been tested in the base Gorshkov.

As already written, it will have more UKSK modules (48 instead of 16/24) and probably more Redut VLS modules.

Maybe they could also increase the numbers of packet antisub/antitorpedo weapons, and install pantsirs instead of kashtan CIWS.


Btw, one interesting innovation tested in the 20386 is an integrated propulsion system, gas turbines and electric motors. Still i am not sure if it would make sense to have such propulsion system in a destroyer.

hoom wrote:Well of course you can stick a container on the heli-pad.

But the claim is that 20386 is testing systems for Super-Gorshkov, have you seen any indication whatsoever that Super-Gorshkov is going to have an elaborate internal container handling system with deck/hull hatches & elevators etc. like 20386?

All they've said about Super-Gorshkov is that it will be about 8000ton and have a lot more missiles.

How about you re-read my post...

magnumcromagnon wrote:

hoom wrote:

I'd say the much maligned 20386 is trialling stuff for a Super-Gorshkov …

I'd say thats incorrect.

20386 has the same radar suite as 20385, its pretty unlikely that Super-Gorshkov will use the same.
Redut is already in service on a bunch of ships.

There has been no indication that Super-Gorshkov will have container modularity in any way, its been exclusively presented as a major missile cell-count increase over Gorshkov which 20386 in no way contributes towards.

That's quite an amusing claim on your part. Your saying container based systems aren't compatible for it, when all they need is a helicopter pad to be 'compatable' because the container system doesn't require a boat to be modular enough, it was designed to increase the power of already existing ships without a ship needing an upgrade. I've never seen any evidence that a container system could be dropped in to the place of a existing cells, so unless they plan on not having a helicopter/pad than a container system could still be utilized. In fact, we could see micro-feeder dual-use container ships being tugged behind existing warships to significantly increase the fire power of existing ships using the container UKSK and Redut.

Drop in modules as in the container actually dropped on to the helipad, and elevated down in to the hangar. Your the only person I've ever heard suggest shipping container cells being a replacement for a UKSK cell.

Your the only person I've ever heard suggest shipping container cells being a replacement for a UKSK cell.

I am not suggesting that at all.
Ain't me that needs to do some reading

one side says we need ships to be overloaded with maximum weapons and consequently crew comfort doesn't matter so much
ie for "total war"

vs

lets sacrifice maximum weapons for mission adaptability (including non military)
and give the crew some more comfort on "peacetime patrols" …
(add to that the cost pressures of running navies - govts like to see "multi-purpose" ships …. )

this ship is skewed to the latter approach ….

if a real war broke out … would you want to be on a ship this size ? I wouldn't
you'd be blown out of the water in 45 minutes ….

If we are talking about WWIII then even aircraft carriers wont last long unless they all scuttle down to the south pole to hide.

A ship operates a lot more in peace time than it does in war time so if it is optimised for war only then your sailors wont thank you for it.

All ships need comfort and endurance built in... the bigger ships more so because they are more likely to go on longer voyages and need space and endurance capacity to show the flag and other things you really don't want to do on a small boat.

The bigger the ship the better variety of weapons and sensor you can put on... a Corvette will not be able to do any particular job on its own and will need other ships to support it, and a frigate has the same issues to a point, but destroyer and cruiser sized vessels should be fully multirole and be able to operate on its own or as the leader of a small group of smaller ships.

With the new net centric systems they are implimenting on their ships and subs and aircraft, a corvette could carry a 400km range SAM, because as a node in a network rather than a tiny ship all on its own it should be able to be passed target date for the launch and it should be able to position itself for that attack and then withdraw to avoid any response better than larger vessels might.