Project 20836 Derzkiy-class modular Corvette

PapaDragon wrote:

My desktop screensaver.

i think its wrong to call this a corvette , its the size of krivak frigate....

Rmf wrote:i think its wrong to call this a corvette , its the size of krivak frigate....

Gorshkov is frigate even though it easily qualifies as destroyer and Zumvalt is destroyer even though it is practically full scale cruiser or battlecruiser.

This is new era with new rules it seems.

PapaDragon wrote:

Rmf wrote:i think its wrong to call this a corvette , its the size of krivak frigate....

Gorshkov is frigate even though it easily qualifies as destroyer and Zumvalt is destroyer even though it is practically full scale cruiser or battlecruiser.

This is new era with new rules it seems.  

Which DD you comparing it to and why exactly?.

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

PapaDragon wrote:

Rmf wrote:i think its wrong to call this a corvette , its the size of krivak frigate....

Gorshkov is frigate even though it easily qualifies as destroyer and Zumvalt is destroyer even though it is practically full scale cruiser or battlecruiser.

This is new era with new rules it seems.  

Which DD you comparing it to and why exactly?.

Sovremennyy size-wise but capability-wise it is way superior. Doesn't lag too much behind Udaloi as well.

Ant it outguns both of them.

but why redut in front of the gun, not behind it like it is a usual setup?

and if the claims of new pantsir-m are true and has 40km range missiles, why bother.
put 2 naval pantcir there and you have good medium and close AA you want, with many more missiles ,then no need for redut nore a gun and no dedicated ciws - freeing lot of internal space  ,and no need for troublesome poliment aesa since pantcir has his own radar.

PapaDragon wrote:

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

PapaDragon wrote:

Rmf wrote:i think its wrong to call this a corvette , its the size of krivak frigate....

Gorshkov is frigate even though it easily qualifies as destroyer and Zumvalt is destroyer even though it is practically full scale cruiser or battlecruiser.

This is new era with new rules it seems.  

Which DD you comparing it to and why exactly?.

Sovremennyy size-wise but capability-wise it is way superior. Doesn't lag too much behind Udaloi as well.

Ant it outguns both of them.

Then I don't feel that's a fair assessment has comparing it to ships way past their peak point.

I thought you where comparing it to modern DD's not old soviet classes

GarryB wrote:Good point George... with improvements in AESA radars and SAMs and with universal missile launchers like UKSK and vessel in the Russian Navy can pretend to be a destroyer or cruiser even when they are a corvette.

What surprises me is that the space where there are two quad angled launchers for Uran, they could have put a UKSK launcher with much bigger missiles.

The only issue is the depth of such launchers would effect the design of the ship down several decks but I think if they only put in one 8 tube launcher there should be space at each side to walk around the launchers to get to the front or rear of the ship...

this design seems to have the maximum internal space for systems and equipment with its enormous box like structure. Fitting embedded antennas for AESA radars and other sensors is the best compromise for low RCS and situational awareness too.

They are planning to use them in closed seas like Black sea and Baltic sea so Urans are enough. They are very capable missiles which can attack all ships operating there, with their range covering all the area. No need for UKSK which are already on gorshkovs, grigorovichs, subs, new corvettes...

These corvettes are a cheap replacement of their soviet era antiship corvettes. They don't need to be multi role. The hangar for the container is a cheap solution for making them multi role, if needed. I don't think they will sistematicly carry Klub-K, maybe never ...

Rmf wrote:but why redut in front of the gun, not behind it like it is a usual setup?

and if the claims of new pantsir-m are true and has 40km range missiles, why bother.
put 2 naval pantcir there and you have good medium and close AA you want, with many more missiles ,then no need for redut nore a gun and no dedicated ciws - freeing lot of internal space  ,and no need for troublesome poliment aesa since pantcir has his own radar.

My guess is because container space and hangar in the back. It's a lot of empty space so they moved gun towards center of the ship to improve balance. Besides it's hardly first ship to have missiles in front of a gun.

As for Pantsir, yes it is good but Redut is far superior and good Aesa radar is always handy. Besides, it may get Pantsir yet on top of everything.

And Redut launchers mean better upgrade potential down the road.

if its 120km redut.... but its probably 50 km missiles since radar has 70km guidance. also radars seem low and missiles launch exaust might disturb or damage them if it is close.
Anyway in my opinion -2 pantcir with 24 missiles and 4*30mm ciws guns is much better for corvete.

Rmf wrote:if its 120km redut.... but its probably 50 km missiles since radar has 70km guidance. also radars seem low and missiles launch exaust might disturb or damage them if it is close.
Anyway in my opinion -2 pantcir with 24 missiles and 4*30mm ciws guns is much better for corvete.

Pantsir is already on small missile boats (22800) so corvette would go with something bigger.

Although given the size of this thing it is already hard to figure out if it is overgrown corvette or mini frigate.

The Steregushchys were expensive for what they were and the Gremyaschys even more so.

Having a new light corvette with decent range makes sense. If Kalibrs are needed then there are plenty of other vessels with that capability.

so how many those large containers can it carry? 1? why not space for 2?
.....and if it has a container then it cant have helicopter onboard?

old video but very good.
https://youtu.be/mbUU_9bOcnM?t=51s

Rmf wrote:so how many those large containers can it carry? 1? why not space for 2?
.....and if it has a container then it cant have helicopter onboard?

old video but very good.

Evil Russian propaganda film, just a dream............................oh wait

From the model shown it has room for two containers while still carrying a helicopter.

PapaDragon wrote:

Rmf wrote:if its 120km redut.... but its probably 50 km missiles since radar has 70km guidance. also radars seem low and missiles launch exaust might disturb or damage them if it is close.
Anyway in my opinion -2 pantcir with 24 missiles and 4*30mm ciws guns is much better for corvete.

Pantsir is already on small missile boats (22800) so corvette would go with something bigger.

Although given the size of this thing it is already hard to figure out if it is overgrown corvette or mini frigate.

yes i know but 2 main threats low flying airplanes and cruise missiles since that radar horizont is 50-60 meters at 40 km away..... so anyway redut range is further reduced to be comparable to pantcir s .

Still trying to like this & mostly failing  

Couple of interesting things via Balancer forum:
Some people have been modelling the hull with ship design software, either: the given dimensions are correct but the displacement has a typo & should be 2,400t -> 2*MF90 would be crazy high power, or the 3,400t displacement is correct but the dimensions are waterline -> overall dimensions more like proj. 11356 & 2*MF90 is a reasonable power.

Its a very fine bow, only hits max beam about the rear of the superstructure, unusual but should be good for high-speed.

Charly015 graphic


I like the new gun shield & locating it to rear of Redut.
Amazes me how many designs put missiles so close to the bridge where misfire or combat damage could potentially wipe out the command crew.
The cost is slightly lower traverse arc for the gun but it's still a pretty good arc, definitely better than 20385.

I don't like just one AK-630 or even the original 2*, they have poor arcs & a lot of the arc is blocked for the Centaur fire control radar by the funnels.
It's tempting to think it's just a temp setup for something better later but I see nowhere to put a better point defence like Naval Pantsir, Naval Tor or even a Gibhka without looking really odd & probably being a big CoG issue.

I still don't like Urans instead of UKSK.
I want to see a better explanation for the containerised system, from what I've seen of it I think its much more limited than people are assuming

These two videos will help you find some answers:





Pay close attention of how those motor boats for special forces are launched. The ship can accommodate at least 3 of those.

This is a true multi purpose ship: Anti air (Redut), anti-ship (Uran + anti-ship Kalibr in container), anti submarine (paket + helicopter), anti land (Kalibr + 100mm) and special forces (fast boats).

In a package that is stealthy and quiet (CODLAG propulsion).

The plan is to build 10 of these, so not a bad ship Russia could use more frigates.

flamming_python wrote:The Steregushchys were expensive for what they were and the Gremyaschys even more so.

Having a new light corvette with decent range makes sense. If Kalibrs are needed then there are plenty of other vessels with that capability.

But isn't that the point of it all, so every corvette can potentially threaten an Murican destroyer. I'm reading the comments and details presented here and it seams to me that there in no valid excuse of not putting an 8 cell vertical launcher in the first place.

Aldo I am still not sure, will every ship have 8 subsonic AS missiles, a helicopter AND a quad Kalibr launcher, can this be use to fire the Onix AS missile, if so then this is pretty impressive for a 105m long ship no mater what.

Pay close attention of how those motor boats for special forces are launched. The ship can accommodate at least 3 of those

Yes but look closely at the container handling system, lengths, positions & think how you would go about shuffling the containers.

The containerised Calibr uses 40ft, the only image I've seen with a 40ft container has it in the hangar.
Container Calibr requires at least 1* 20ft container too.


The assumption people are making is that you can fit & shuffle around 2* 40ft Calibr containers as well as the 20ft, a helicopter & towed sonar.
I'm not convinced that there is room to shuffle 40ft containers in the boat launch section, might just be enough room but I think it's more likely that its only 1* 40ft & it stays in the hangar -> exclusive of chopper.
If you can shuffle it may be at expense of the towed sonar as well as chopper.

Here's some other pics




This one shows a trolley type system for moving containers but also shows the doors to the hangar opening inwards to the boat-deck -> would be a huge impediment to shuffling 40ft containers.



We know 22160 can handle both 2* container Calibr + Helicopter because it is explicitly shown in the models, 2* hatches & the telescopic chopper hangar is forward on the main deck.

So I've been reading this http://www.oborona.ru/includes/periodics/navy/2015/0625/140716058/detail.shtml
Makes some pretty interesting points.

I didn't really get the point of partial-electric power but it's for quiet low speed ASW/anti-mine work (definitely something that 20380/5 don't do), switch in the gas turbines for high speed where you're going to be noisy anyway.

Talks a bunch about optimising the crew areas & other interior bits for reduced crew work -> crew reduction.

Definitely they see the hangar as part of the multi-mode volume so I think is likely that certain loadouts are at the expense of the chopper.
Apparently the lift is also intended to make shore side loading/unloading of not only multi-mission stuff but normal ship stores/ammo which is pretty interesting.

Long fine bow is definitely for better speed/wave-piercing.