Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov]

zg18 wrote:"Admiral Nakhimov" modernization

Dang, i thought they were further along, looks like we wont see this ship in service till at least late 2020.

George1 wrote:
..and artillery weapons

Hmm.. I wonder what artillery weapons they gonna use? I doubt it's gonna be Coalition, but would be good.

Suitably vague... they could mean replacing AK-630 turrets with Duet and Pantsir, or it could be a change from 130mm guns to 152mm guns...

The difference in performance would be rather significant with the 25km range of the 130mm guns being upgraded to the 70km range with guided shells of the Coalition...

Actually we have not seen a new improved modernised 130mm gun mount so far... most have centred around 100mm guns and 76.2mm guns and 57mm guns in new stealthy turrets...

GarryB wrote:Actually we have not seen a new improved modernised 130mm gun mount so far... most have centred around 100mm guns and 76.2mm guns and 57mm guns in new stealthy turrets...

Isn't that the 130mm A-192M, the gun of the Adm. Gorshkov class.

Well duh!!!

You are quite right.

they are cascading the calibres... where previously a light gun boat might have a 57mm gun and a corvette will have a 76.2mm gun and a frigate will have a 100mm gun and a destroyer or cruiser will have a 130mm gun a light patrol boat will have a 57mm gun, a corvette will have a 100mm gun the weight of a 76.2mm gun and the frigate will have a 130mm gun... the question is what will the destroyer and cruiser sized vessels have.

The interesting thing is that new guided shells for the 57mm gun will make it rather more effective in many roles... there is talk in the Army to replace the 30mm cannon in the IFV role and also in the air defence role because where the 57mm lacks in rate of fire it makes up in hitting power and accuracy especially against small targets.

For the Navy the arguments are similar... a very small target needs a direct hit with a 30mm cannon shell as they are generally too small for a proximity fuse. If you picture a 5m by 5m square of target cardboard at 2-3km range a 200 round 30mm cannon burst would randomly puncture the cardboard in several places but there is plenty of empty space left on that target for a cruise missile to sneak through. in comparison a guided 57mm shell with a proximity fuse is much more likely to get close enough to bring even a very small target down without having to fire hundreds of rounds.

the 57mm gun is much heavier than a 30mm gatling gun mount but if it only needs 500 rounds on the mount to do a good job compared with thousands of rounds of 30mm shells it can overall be lighter and more compact.

This means that a Corvette could give up its 30mm cannons for a 57mm dual purpose gun, but also has the potential to see Cruisers replacing their 30mm cannon mounts with 57mm guns too to be used together with 152mm gun mounts.

having said that any technology that can be fitted to the 57mm shells could just as easily be fitted to 76.2mm or 100mm or 130mm or even 152mm shells. Having a fully automatic twin barrel 152mm CIWS that can reach out a dozen kms would be very interesting...

There are CAD drawings of a naval twin Koalition kicking around the place.

Being they are from back when they were still looking to make the land version twin & that changed to single barrel it's probably a no-go but would be pretty cool.

The equipment list http://bmpd.livejournal.com/1124199.html doesn't seem to include even the A-192 so it might just keep its existing mount (or have no gun?)

GarryB wrote:Well duh!!!  

You are quite right.

they are cascading the calibres... where previously a light gun boat might have a 57mm gun and a corvette will have a 76.2mm gun and a frigate will have a 100mm gun and a destroyer or cruiser will have a 130mm gun a light patrol boat will have a 57mm gun, a corvette will have a 100mm gun the weight of a 76.2mm gun and the frigate will have a 130mm gun... the question is what will the destroyer and cruiser sized vessels have.

The interesting thing is that new guided shells for the 57mm gun will make it rather more effective in many roles... there is talk in the Army to replace the 30mm cannon in the IFV role and also in the air defence role because where the 57mm lacks in rate of fire it makes up in hitting power and accuracy especially against small targets.

For the Navy the arguments are similar... a very small target needs a direct hit with a 30mm cannon shell as they are generally too small for a proximity fuse. If you picture a 5m by 5m square of target cardboard at 2-3km range a 200 round 30mm cannon burst would randomly puncture the cardboard in several places but there is plenty of empty space left on that target for a cruise missile to sneak through. in comparison a guided 57mm shell with a proximity fuse is much more likely to get close enough to bring even a very small target down without having to fire hundreds of rounds.

the 57mm gun is much heavier than a 30mm gatling gun mount but if it only needs 500 rounds on the mount to do a good job compared with thousands of rounds of 30mm shells it can overall be lighter and more compact.

This means that a Corvette could give up its 30mm cannons for a 57mm dual purpose gun, but also has the potential to see Cruisers replacing their 30mm cannon mounts with 57mm guns too to be used together with 152mm gun mounts.

having said that any technology that can be fitted to the 57mm shells could just as easily be fitted to 76.2mm or 100mm or 130mm or even 152mm shells. Having a fully automatic twin barrel 152mm CIWS that can reach out a dozen kms would be very interesting...

152mm CIWS?

Replacing 30mm CIWS is very unlikely, 57mm ammunition is wastly more expensive even when you pass it though value-cost. 57mm ammunition has number of advantages but cost is not one of them and cost is main issue with RuNAV to start with. Now 57mm cannons replacing AK-630s in future, sure i see that as plausible, but hybird systems gun-missile very doubtful.

Today you can make very complex fused 30mm ammunition too, age when it required at least 50+ mm calibers are gone.

hoom wrote:There are CAD drawings of a naval twin Koalition kicking around the place.

Being they are from back when they were still looking to make the land version twin & that changed to single barrel it's probably a no-go but would be pretty cool.

The equipment list http://bmpd.livejournal.com/1124199.html doesn't seem to include even the A-192 so it might just keep its existing mount (or have no gun?)

Germans tried adapting Phz-2000 for naval use but determined its very hard to offer adequate salt/rust protection for system.

In a piece of epic German Engineering they put a largely unmodified Pz-2000 turret on a ship.

To their great surprise but not to anyone with a clue, the marine environment caused corrosion issues  

The twin Koalition mount however is clearly a Navalised mount -> would expect it to be appropriately reworked for corrosion resistance (&/or not need it if the Koalition project was intended to be used for a naval mount from the start?)

hoom wrote:In a piece of epic German Engineering they put a largely unmodified Pz-2000 turret on a ship.

To their great surprise but not to anyone with a clue, the marine environment caused corrosion issues  

The twin Koalition mount however is clearly a Navalised mount -> would expect it to be appropriately reworked for corrosion resistance (&/or not need it if the Koalition project was intended to be used for a naval mount from the start?)

That was at the start, later that same turret was removed and Oto Melara gun replaced it, then same that turret was repainted in some grayish marine paint and salt resistance tests were performed and they decided to give up on integration even in future due to i use citation here: "adapting all of the equipment in the PzH 2000 turret for the corrosive naval environment proved more difficult than expected ".

I think they actually decided its not worth the trouble.

George1 wrote:
In accordance with the plan of the factory makes replacement and upgrade the ship's life support systems, electronic weapons,
the ship's energy systems modernization plan also provides for the replacement of complex missile and artillery weapons "Admiral Nakhimov ", - said the source.

Happy new year 2017 Russ defence posts.  

Once again confusion is in the air. See I told you Rus navy will breathe confusion till the ship is ready.
What I understand Life support systems, electronic weapons(What electronic warfare ..??) , and power plant and cabling/wiring technology will be upgraded.
But about the weapons/artillery better to wait and see rather than draw the conclusion.

"I will belive it when I see it"    must be algorithm for all navy ships having granit missiles in their previous generation.
Lets wait for the testing of Zircon and then see what missile launchers WILL BE PLACED.
UKSK/Universal launcher or some other launchers.Kazan has given a well timed shock not to believe anything on here say.
We know that UKSK in severodvinsk was replaced and changed to some (seriously different launcher in Kazan submarine launche tubes).

[quote="gaurav"]

George1 wrote:
..................

We know that UKSK in severodvinsk was replaced and changed to some (seriously different launcher in Kazan submarine launche tubes).

We most definitely do not know that.

Do you have source for this?

They already ordered 10 UKSK launchers for Nakhimonov. What makes you think they will change them this late into the process?

Being they are from back when they were still looking to make the land version twin & that changed to single barrel it's probably a no-go but would be pretty cool.

The Army version lost its second gun to reduce height and weight for air transport capability.

Hardly an issue with a gun mount on a ship where the increase in weight is not problem at all while the increase in rate of fire would offer potential for one turret instead of two... meaning more space for vertical launch tubes for missiles...

Replacing 30mm CIWS is very unlikely, 57mm ammunition is wastly more expensive even when you pass it though value-cost. 57mm ammunition has number of advantages but cost is not one of them and cost is main issue with RuNAV to start with. Now 57mm cannons replacing AK-630s in future, sure i see that as plausible, but hybird systems gun-missile very doubtful.

It is not just about cost. A 57mm shell killing small manouvering targets out to 10km range is more effective with one or two shells than a 30mm gun turret firing hundreds of shells at much closer targets.

Today you can make very complex fused 30mm ammunition too, age when it required at least 50+ mm calibers are gone.

Very limited as to how much actual explosive material can be contained in a 30mm shell... and again the range is limited.

When anti ship missiles have payloads of hundreds of kgs of HE then even destroying the missile at 300m would not be good enough. The further out you can hit it and defeat it the better.

Also against light speed boats a 57mm shell will have rather more punch than 30mm shells...

Germans tried adapting Phz-2000 for naval use but determined its very hard to offer adequate salt/rust protection for system.

But that is key... the Coalition was a joint programme between the army and navy from the start... this is not the case of the navy trying to use an off the shelf army system for a ship.

I think they actually decided its not worth the trouble.

Of course it is not.

Several weapons designed for navy use have however successfully been moved to the land including the 100mm gun of the SU-100 tank destroyer...

UKSK/Universal launcher or some other launchers.Kazan has given a well timed shock not to believe anything on here say.
We know that UKSK in severodvinsk was replaced and changed to some (seriously different launcher in Kazan submarine launche tubes).

What are you talking about?

The Universal Launcher is the new standard cruise missile launcher for land attack, anti ship, and anti sub missiles... what else would they fit into a Kirov class ship?

The Oscar class apparently had sleeves to fit into its existing granit tubes... AFAIK there are no other options than the UKSK launchers.

gaurav wrote:
UKSK/Universal launcher or some other launchers.Kazan has given a well timed shock not to believe anything on here say.
We know that UKSK in severodvinsk was replaced and changed to some (seriously different launcher in Kazan submarine launche tubes).

This old chestnut again? UKSK is for surface vessels, while submarines like Pr 885/885M use an altogether different VLS obviously designed for underwater launch. Submarine conversions like Pr 949AM use another design which converts the existing P-800 launch tubes to carry Oniks/Kalibre in sub-diameter internally-fitted canisters.

I think they actually decided its not worth the trouble.

They should have known from the start that it wouldn't work out due to corrosion issues on a mount designed for land only, it was a complete waste of time & money.

Back on topic: Charly015 has a take on what he thinks Nakhimov will be like when upgraded http://charly015.blogspot.co.nz/2017/01/sobre-la-modernizacion-del-nakimov.html

If a single 30mmx165mm shell can destroy an F-15, it sill do the same to a harpoon, kongsberg, brimstone, JSOW or whatever. And I dont see NATO putting armor on their AShMs soon. They're too busy drooling over stealth. There is absolutely no point in increasing CIWS calibre, only increasing its shell velocity, electronics, and ROF.

hoom wrote:

I think they actually decided its not worth the trouble.

They should have known from the start that it wouldn't work out due to corrosion issues on a mount designed for land only, it was a complete waste of time & money.

Back on topic: Charly015 has a take on what he thinks Nakhimov will be like when upgraded http://charly015.blogspot.co.nz/2017/01/sobre-la-modernizacion-del-nakimov.html

If I recall, Redut was not on the list of equipments.

chicken wrote:
If I recall, Redut was not on the list of equipments.

Redut is not even ready. Let alone in production.

If I recall, Redut was not on the list of equipments.

I guess that's the big mystery: Logically having removed the Kinzhal presumably something is going there instead, Redut would be the obvious candidate.
Whether intentional or accidental the list http://bmpd.livejournal.com/1124199.html fails to name 5P-20K as Poliment radar but you're right there doesn't appear to be a Redut (3K96) entry.

There is 3M-48 = S300FM without separately naming launcher & radar (could be just an electronic upgrade to the existing S300 hardware), so possibly Redut launchers would be included as part of that or as part of 5P-20K?

If a single 30mmx165mm shell can destroy an F-15, it sill do the same to a harpoon, kongsberg, brimstone, JSOW or whatever. And I dont see NATO putting armor on their AShMs soon. They're too busy drooling over stealth. There is absolutely no point in increasing CIWS calibre, only increasing its shell velocity, electronics, and ROF.

But that is the problem... a single 30mm cannon shell could bring down an F-15 but it has to hit it in exactly the right place to do so. Just the same as a 50 calibre browning HMG round that hits someones fingertip wont kill them but a tiny .22LR round through the brain box will kill anyone.

the point is that even with all sorts of wonderful fuses and increases in muzzle velocity and shell weight a 30mm cannon shell wont be much use beyond about 3km and even then it would require enormous burst rates to be effective against small targets.

A single 57mm guided shell should be able to kill small point targets out to 8km or more with one or two shots... more importantly killing it quicker so follow up targets can be engaged much more rapidly.

For instance laser beam riding 57mm shells could be guided independently of the gun so 10 or 20 EO systems on board the ship could each find a target and mark that target... the 57mm gun mount could fire 20 rounds in about 4 seconds (at 300rpm that is 5 shells a second) and then it can wait for the result... as targets are hit follow up shells could be fired or new targets engaged... and this is in addition to short range missiles like Pantsir or VERBA or Morfei or indeed Kinzhal (Naval TOR) at leakers.

For instance laser beam riding 57mm shells could be guided independently of the gun so 10 or 20 EO systems on board the ship could each find a target and mark that target... the 57mm gun mount could fire 20 rounds in about 4 seconds (at 300rpm that is 5 shells a second) and then it can wait for the result... as targets are hit follow up shells could be fired or new targets engaged... and this is in addition to short range missiles like Pantsir or VERBA or Morfei or indeed Kinzhal (Naval TOR) at leakers.

Do you think it's possible to do so ? 57mm is bigger than 30mm but it's not that much big to fit a laser detector and the electronic in it, moreover there is the issue with the fire which make the round very hot.

A nice thing and cheaper would be to preprogram them to explode near the target by anticepating the trajectory with radars like those we find on pantsir or kashtan. There is a video of the same system made by BAE I think (I alrreay put that video on another topic). You can shot at max distances with max dammage to the missile.

If a single 30mmx165mm shell can destroy an F-15, it sill do the same to a harpoon, kongsberg, brimstone, JSOW or whatever. And I dont see NATO putting armor on their AShMs soon. They're too busy drooling over stealth. There is absolutely no point in increasing CIWS calibre, only increasing its shell velocity, electronics, and ROF.

Having a CIWS that can shot down some missiles at 7-10km and another one thant can shot down the rest of the salvo is not a bad idea. They can operate in automatic mode so they don't need lot of operators.

If I recall, Redut was not on the list of equipments.

Maybe not the lunchers but they could have upgraded radars to S-400 lvl and missiles will go in the big lunchers. And they can use the bigger missiles, which is not possible with the redut.

Relying in guided large calibre shells is putting all your eggs in one basket IMO.
There is no alternative to putting enough lead in the sky.
You don't need an exact spot to destroy an F-15 using a 30mm shell. Hit the wing? The entire wing will be ripped off and control surfaces destroyed. Hit the fuselage? 30mm Shrapnel will always utterly ignite the engines. A 30mm hit will either disintegrate or rip a harpoon in half. You cant ask for more.

BTW if you want to look at high caliber low ROF CIWS, see the 40mm dardo. you cant make me believe this will down even a subsonic missile.

Admiral Nakhimov will be equipped with supercomputers and ZIRKON missiles.

Modernization of cruiser will end in 2020.

http://www.vpk-news.ru/news/34729

Isos wrote:

If I recall, Redut was not on the list of equipments.

Maybe not the lunchers but they could have upgraded radars to S-400 lvl and missiles will go in the big lunchers. And they can use the bigger missiles, which is not possible with the redut.

Redut is the VLS, the missiles that it carry can also be accommodated in S-300FM. Or so I think.



I believe they just insert the bins into the ship

hoom wrote:I guess that's the big mystery: Logically having removed the Kinzhal presumably something is going there instead, Redut would be the obvious candidate.

Probably just an upgrade

A naval version of the Tor-M2U is being developed by Izhevsk Electromechanical Plant Kupol for integration on to the Russian Navy vessels.

http://www.army-technology.com/projects/tor-m2u-air-defence-missile-system-adms/