Russia-Venezuela naval exercises begin

[NUS]

Those Kirovs are paper thin and if something offensive makes contact with the hull its all over but damn they pack a wollop.

I'm curious, why do you call them paper thin? I've found this:

Kirov Class : Data

Unusually in a modern ship, armour is fitted, presumably of a Kevlar-type rather than traditional steel.

Or there is something else you wanted to say?

[chakos]

Its obvious. If it was a USN ship the armour would be impenetrable, its air defence system the most advanced in the world and its anti shipping missiles the most effective ever made. Its crew would also be the most professional, best looking and be able to leap tall buildings in a single bound. :))

[Gun Grape]

Its obvious. If it was a USN ship the armour would be impenetrable,

No but it is better than the Kirov class. Burkes and Ticos use steel AND Kevlar. We don't build to be impenetrable.

However US Navy ships have taken damage and survived where other Navies have had ships sink from far less damage. We must be doing something right. Like ship design and damage control training.

its air defence system the most advanced in the world

Can you tell me a system that is better than Aegis? Or has a demonstrated effectiveness better than Aegis/SM. Yes we do have the best shipborne air defense system in the world.

and its anti shipping missiles the most effective ever made.

AShM are an afterthought to the US. You may notice that Harpoons are not carried on the Flight 2 Burkes. And we got rid of TASM. We fight as part of a system. A ship based AShM isn't on the top of our list. We have other things that can take care of that.

[zraver]

Its obvious. If it was a USN ship the armour would be impenetrable, its air defence system the most advanced in the world and its anti shipping missiles the most effective ever made. Its crew would also be the most professional, best looking and be able to leap tall buildings in a single bound. :))

Lets see the US Aegis+ SM2/SM3, ESSM combo has a better radar than the Kirvo/Tombstone+ Tor M1, S-300MF, Grisom, the missiles are probably tied. The SM-3 can knock down low flying sats and the SM-3 and SM-2 both have ABM abilities but the Tor M1 can hit free falling bombs (or so it is claimed) The Kirovs, Kashtan system is superior to the phalanx and is probably better than the RAM system as well since it combines 2x 30mm Gatling plus the Grisom SAM.

Command, control, and crew training go to the US as does strategic intelligence assets.

As for anti-shipping missiles the Kirovs 20 SS-N-19's missiles are big and nasty, but are 1980's technology and should be spoofable or jammable especially since the missiles talk to each other.

But depending on the threat the SM-2 has a proven anti-surface role. It proved more effective than the Harpoon during operation preying mantis.

I'm curious, why do you call them paper thin? I've found this:

Kirov Class : Data
Or there is something else you wanted to say?

As far as I know the anti-spall liner is only around the CIC and the reactor room is proof vs then current 76mm naval rounds. The rest of the ship is simply a sea hull.

Kirov come sin at 24,000 tons and has both steam and nuclear plants and 500 missiles as well as steel construction. There simply isn't the weight for adequate protection. If the Kirov gets hit with something serious and her magazines are still full she's in trouble.

[CrusDiv 7]

In a more likely scenario, the Kirov will be destroyed before its weapon system even fires in anger by a JDAM dropped by a B-2 on its large magazine spaces creating the largest explosion at sea since the Yamato went down in 1945.

Well, That scenario allmost certainly requiers the russian sailors to be both incompetent and stupid, Wich not is the case,

The Kirov is a weapons platform built to fire the Shipwreck missile. So yes, it is designed as a carrier killer, but a bad one at that. The Russian navy has a more capable and survivable weapon system that can deliver the same weapon, the OSCAR II SSGNs.

While the Oscar has the capability to launch a massive SSM strike, it is a large and lucrative target for any Allied SSN and would therefore be at considerable risk. To date only three of these boats have been built. The apparent slowdown in the deployment of SSGNs seems to me suggest a recognition of their limited capabilities in the ASW platform rich environment surrounding a CBG.

I learnt long ago not to underestimate an enemy..

[Dreadnought]

Or the power of idiots in large numbers.;)

[gunnut]

Or the power of idiots in large numbers.;)

We call that Congress...

[steelface581]

Its obvious. If it was a USN ship the armour would be impenetrable, its air defence system the most advanced in the world and its anti shipping missiles the most effective ever made. Its crew would also be the most professional, best looking and be able to leap tall buildings in a single bound. :))

ive encountered this attitude on other naval discussion boards.... it seems that me and my fellow americans are doomed because as our reputation drops in the world, so does the capability of our systems.....give it a year or two more and our Burks wont stand a chance against the Iranian speed boats:))

you asked when the last time a standard was fired in anger? well, specifically against ships, a US destroyer group engaged an Iranian force in 1989, its been awhile and i cant recall the specifics, but Standard missiles where used to sink one Iranian frigate and wreck another, am sure others here can give you all the details on that incident

everyone raves about the kitchen/shipwreck (the Kitchen being the faster of the two and is air launched, but their flight characteristics are similar) missiles....as if their speed alone buys them immunity from interception (never mind that that mach 4 speed is only reached in its dive toward the target)--- most target drones used in western navies fly at or above mach 4, and those missiles are the size of a fair sized aircraft--easily tracked -you don't think we can shoot them down????---the sm-6(and the sm-2 block 4 before it) can take out ballistic missile targets that fly at just shy of 11000mph on the way back down. ...mach 4 in a dive???....see where im going with this???

if the missiles where that effective, there would be no carriers- another thing , aegis was a response to saturation tactics-these missiles, not the other way around.

on paper they look impressive, why haven't we built a similar sized vessel?


as for the armor- they are virtually unarmored, Kevlar over the mags to prevent moderate sized shells from penetrating (20mm, maybe 40mm tops), nothing that would stop damage from ANY anti ship missile....

[Dreadnought]

We call that Congress...

[biteasaur]

kdx -3

hello, isnt the seijong the great ,the korean kdx 3series as capable as peter the great,if fully loaded out the korean ship looks impressive,im not downing the russian cruiser by any means.i still like the ticos and burkes better.

[IDonT]

hello, isnt the seijong the great ,the korean kdx 3series as capable as peter the great,if fully loaded out the korean ship looks impressive,im not downing the russian cruiser by any means.i still like the ticos and burkes better.

The KDX-3 are basically Flight IIa Burkes with extra VLS cells. Its not how many missiles a ship has that marks it as a superb platform, but its weapon systems. Not all Aegis systems are created equal.

[Shipwreck]

Peter the Great in Toulon, France :

[Gun Grape]

Peter the Great in Toulon, France :

What, the cheapskates couldn't afford to dock? Libo boats in Toulon really suck. One of the worst ports for them in the Med.

[eocoolj]

Peter the Great in Toulon, France :

Well, I'll say one thing for the Russians, thats a pretty fine looking warship.

[maximusslade]

I would have to disagree. Seems very cluttered to me.