533cm torps? The reason other frigates don't carry those is because, it's completely unessecary. Smaller torps are faster and will sink any submarine.
The reason that western frigates don't carry them is because they are big and heavy and not cheap... and western 21 inch torpedoes are very expensive.
533mm torpedoes have much longer range and much heavier warheads than small calibre torpedoes.
533mm torpedoes can be used against ships as well as submarines effectively too.
The Russians and the Soviets before them had a range of small calibre torpedoes... they had the option and chose the bigger, longer ranged, more effective weapon.
The launch tubes are standard so if they wanted to they could load SS-N-15 or Club missiles in those tubes if they wanted too.
Bigger isn't better dude, you should know better by now.
When it comes to torpedoes it actually does imply longer range and better warhead...
An RBU? Lol that's another piece of technology that is pointless. No other navies bother with those because the ship has torpedos and Choppers for ASW.
Of course... the west doesn't use those so it must be useless.
RBUs are very versatile and come with a fairly wide range of ammunition including guided rockets. For a ship like a frigate it is actually a very valuable system that can be used against divers in the water as well as incoming enemy torpedoes and submarines as well as small submersibles and unmanned under water vessels too... but the west don't use them so it must be useless right?
Putting a pointless feature on a ship doesn't make it good.
Calling a useful feature pointless doesn't make it pointless.
Shtill is also very short-range and have other faults, I don't know why people insist on fanboying over this class.
Yeah, 90km range for the current model BUK-M3 is not the best range in the world but it is pretty good for a frigate and it can intercept a fairly wide range of targets too.
You are right about one thing it is cost-effective because it's made up of mostly old technology that doesn't cut it anymore.
I keep hearing western experts say this... which US small calibre torpedo is better than a Russian 533mm one?
Which US system to defend their ship from divers and torpedos and subs is better than RBU of any model?
Which western frigate of any design has better weapons?
RBU can also destroy a submarine or mines fields.
It can also be used against Divers in the water and includes sonar equipment and is remotely operated... meaning 24/7 day night and all weather capacity to engage targets in the water...
Shtill has a 45km range, that's the range of modern radars against low flying missiles. As soon as they see the anti ship missile it can target it with an air defence missile at max range.
That is BUK-M2, or the naval equivalent of the SA-17. Ie the model the Russian ground forces have in service but are now replacing with the tube launched M3 model with longer range and better performance. (The SA-11 is the model Ukrainian forces used to shoot down an airliner over the Ukraine a while back...)
Being more cost effective you can buy 2 for one nato frigate.
Especially if you don't play chicken with civilian ships and end up running aground and sinking...
The sub will go to a depth where munitions like 91RE1 and 90R cannot reach, fast projectile will only matter IF they somehow catch the submarine out of position which would be very unlikely a submarine will always know you are around before you know they are around.
The APR-3ME is a good representation of the small torpedo payload of the rocket powered 91RE1 and the Medvedka ballistic rockets that deliver torpedos to targets... and it can engage targets down to 800m depth.... this smart submarine captain you say will go to a depth where these weapons wont reach is going to kill his own crew by going well below the crush depth of any standard SSN I have ever heard of...
Mark 48's are smaller than the Kalibes that go in those tubes, though the kalibers are faster they have a much shorter range due to the fact they have to burn tons of fuel.
The 91ER1 moves at mach 2.5 on a ballistic trajectory out to 50km in the export model.
A sub target that locates the Russian ships and launches torpedoes will give away their location through launching their torpedoes... the 91ER1 will reach the location the torpedo was launched from much faster than that torpedo can cover a small fraction of the distance to the target.
These missiles will not threaten a submarine unless said submarine gets way to close.
The 91ER1 threatens any sub within a circle 100km around any ship or sub armed with a UKSK launcher.
I wasn't counting cruise missiles but alias they do not have a longer range in the water , so when you say longer range that's a very very big lie.
Current land attack cruise missiles have a range of 2,500km, the subsonic and supersonic anti ship versions should have ranges of 2,000km and 1,500km respectively, because they are basically the same missile with the extra mass of a nose mounted radar to find a ship target.
In terms of being fired at by Torpedos that is a problem, all navies have a hard dealing with the RBU series of weapons that have a very low intercept rate. So not sure why you are bringing this up, it's a pointless statement.
RBU have a broad range of ammo types for a range of different roles, from guided depth charge (ie noise seeking depth charge), through to surface mine that reacts to objects near it in the water (for divers and torpedos) as well as decoy and noise maker models (torpedo defence).
or maybe you are ignorant enough to think RBU's have some amazing intercept rate they don't, idk there.
RBu's could sink a submarine but the munitions depth they fire is at most 1k.
You clearly have expert knowledge on their ability and performance... perhaps enough said.
So the submarine captain would need to be one dumb fuck to get hit by that, again you don't understand the weapons you are ranting about.
A bit like saying a bullet proof vest is pointless because when the enemy see you have one they will just shoot you in the head... so why wear those heavy awkward things... right?
Well it has a 50km range not 45, also when intercepting other missiles you need at least 2 missiles per one trying to intercept so in reality, the system can only make at most 12 intercept attempts.
No it doesn't. Tests have shown the new BUK is much more accurate than the S-300, so two missiles would not be needed for every target... a second missile would be used only if needed... and most of the time it wont.
Also the chances it will be allowed to intercept from max range is very low assuming it spots the missile before it even enters max range which is a huge IF at best., if you knew anything about missile interception which clearly you don't. You'd know max range isn't an effective intercept range.
If you know so much you must also know these vessels are part of an air defence network that shares target information... a missile that has an effective range of 50km doesn't mean it can only actually hit targets much closer because it has to wait for the target to reach 50km before it can launch.
The 50km range of the BUK M2 is the range at which it can intercept targets to. In the real world it could probably hit low flying targets at 55km, but probably not high flying targets at that range.
For the Shtill it's effective intercept range would be much shorter than that, it's a shitty air defense system that was put on because it was cheap and easy. It's a goddam EXPORT LAUNCHER. So go on put Shtill's on your ships, and enjoy that piss poor air defense they offer.
Shtil is an Army area defence SAM, that is perfectly capable. The current models are even better.
Depends on the Nato frigate some carry eight others carry more, get your information in order.
Big deal... 8 subsonic anti ship missiles is pathetic even for a Corvette and their Frigates are armed that way?
No, the ship isn't "very good" it only takes someone with an idea of naval knowledge to look at the thing and know it's bad for the times.
If you can find such a person please get him to log on here and we can put him right too.
There is no kalibr in the tube bu type 53 torpedoes.
After Mindstorms post I think he is confusing 91ER1 with Kalibr.
For export it is part of the Club family I suppose... all a bit confusing, but Mindstorm is correct, a frigate is more likely to carry a 91ER1 than an actual torpedo.
Type 53 has 50km range and more for newest variants.
91ER1 has a 50km ballistic range at mach 2.5 and then a small calibre torpedo starts its attack from there...
But the main goal of the rbu is to destroy torpedoes.
And divers or trained dolphins if it comes to that in ports and closed in areas...
The thing is that for pro US fanboys if a russian ship can't go alone against a carrier group and win then it sucks.
x2... unrealistic expectations... and fanboy mentality... if it isn't the best the it is the worst...
Home
Latest images
Register
Log in
and what that should mean ? 
Do you have the most pale idea of what you talk about ?
