Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Kirov-class battlecruisers

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Just thought I would mention this.

    "Speaking about overhaul cost of our nuclear cruisers, one should consider that their utilization is comparable to repair costs. Actually, the ships may be put into service even after incomplete reactivation, if needed.

    Author: Alexander Grigoriev, engineer. 13.11.09

    As I mentioned in prior posts, with no clear mission (please dont say ABM shield for Russia as some have wildly speculated) at hand to justify the costs of rebuilding them chances are they will be confined to being tied up as pier queens. That is "if" they choose to waste the money on these ships.

    Further:

    Nuclear cruiser fleet up for modernization
    2010-05-06

    The "Admiral Nakhimov" (Sevmash.ru)

    Russia has decided to rebuild its fleet of laid-up nuclear cruisers of the Kirov-class, a source in the military industrial complex says.
    In September 2009 Deputy Minister of Defense Vladimir Popovkin said in an interview that Russia needs a renovated fleet of surface vessels, and that the nuclear powered cruisers were subject to reconstruction programs that were being developed.

    Now a decision on this issue has been made, and the two nuclear cruisers “Admiral Ushakov” of the Northern Fleet and “Admiral Nakhimov” of the Pacific Fleet will be kept in service after modernization, a source in the military industrial complex told Interfax, TV29 reports. Both the vessels are currently moored in Severodvinsk.

    According to the navy source, 500-600 million RUB have already been allocated to modernization of “Admiral Nakhimov”. Modernization should be finished by 2011, but the time table will most probably be changed, TV29 writes. So far, no money has been allocated for repairs of the Northern Fleet cruiser.
    Last edited by Dreadnought; 17 Jul 11,, 22:49.
    Fortitude.....The strength to persist...The courage to endure.

    Comment


    • #32
      kato


      Originally posted by kato View Post
      The only VLS rack in existance that carries any noticable armor is the Mk56 PVLS. Which isn't going on any ship.
      I hunted for an image of the Mk56 PVLS you mentioned and came up with zip. All I found was the Mk48/MK56 sea sparrow launcher and I don't think you were referring to those. Got an image?

      Originally posted by kato
      Ah, but it has to penetrate there first. Note that the wall behind the containers is pretty close. There's probably at least 5 meters worth of compartments between that and the outer hull itself.
      Obviously I said nothing about a Kirov needing WW2 vintage 12" armored belts, 7" thick armored decks, and massive 11" to 17" barbettes. I simply question the apparent lack of even minor splinter protection between those rotary cells in the forward missile gallery and the potential for the sympathetic detonation of adjacent cells because of it.

      To be honest no reasonable amount of armor can prevent penetration☼. That's something as a USMC Tanker I am constantly aware of. But with that said there are ways to prevent the catastrophic K-Kill results of a chain detonation of ordinance in some situations without a lot of mass. Observe:

      I think the way to go is to start from the position that penetration will occur and then working towards minimizing the effects of that penetration via blow out panels, blast deflection, controlled venting and damage control systems. Things that have been done for many decades.

      And as I have said before all of this may have been done to protect the Kirov. Perhaps the entire missile gallery is designed so that a chain detonation is directed up and away from the ships vitals...I don't know.

      I also agree that the 5 meters worth of compartments you spoke of would provide some protection especially if the interior walls and deck of the missile gallery are stronger than the gallery roof to allow for a controlled blowout away from the interior of the ship in the event of penetration that caused a secondary effect.

      ☼ Imagine the impossibility of preventing penetration of a warhead such as the type used by a Conventional Trident had it not been nixed. A shot pattern of small depleted uranium or Tungsten-Cobalt long rod projectiles that upon warhead function are blasted towards a target at Mach five or better. A harpoon with such a warhead could slam a couple of hundred such projectiles into an enemy ship.


      Since penetration can not be prevented with any degree of certainty without an impossible amount of steel and ceramic armor I think the boys in R & D and procurement are correct in thinking of warhead intercept and destruction as a ships primary defense. But I am still in favor of taking whatever passive measures are necessary to minimize and contain damage..especially on large warships.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Xbow View Post
        I hunted for an image of the Mk56 PVLS you mentioned and came up with zip.
        PVLS (pics at link) was the system that's supposed to go on DD(X). It's effectively a whole belt armor section replacing part of the side of a ship with a VLS (called AVLS, advanced VLS) embedded into it. The armor is not protecting the VLS from impacts, but instead acts as an armored bulkhead between VLS and ship.

        Along with AGS it's responsible for the huge oversized-ness in displacement of DD(X). In its current iteration - with some changes - it's called Mk57.

        Originally posted by Xbow View Post
        And as I have said before all of this may have been done to protect the Kirov. Perhaps the entire missile gallery is designed so that a chain detonation is directed up and away from the ships vitals...I don't know.
        Or the bulkheads are constructed in such a way as to prevent immediate terminal damage to the missile launch containers, making it possible to just launch the whole load away from the ship in those 30 seconds or so you have until the fire from the missile explosion reaches it.
        Last edited by kato; 17 Jul 11,, 23:36.

        Comment


        • #34
          What would Refurbished Kirov's do for a living?

          Originally posted by Dreadnought View Post
          As I mentioned in prior posts, with no clear mission (please dont say ABM shield for Russia as some have wildly speculated) at hand to justify the costs of rebuilding them chances are they will be confined to being tied up as pier queens. That is "if" they choose to waste the money on these ships.
          Dreadnought, I have to agree 100%. These are ships that have no realistic mission configured and armed as they are. And the ABM defense theory seems to be unlikely especially in light of the fact that using such a large and vulnerable platform packed with ABM/ASAT weaponry is an inefficient way to go about it. Better if they distributed their S-400's and S-500's on a number of smaller ships as we have done with RIM-161 SM-3. They would certainly be able to cover more 3D space that way.

          Their previous mission of killing carriers with a swarm of P-700 granit missiles was based on a degree of coordination and detection that the Soviets never demonstrated. In order for their scheme to have worked back in the day our carrier battle groups would have had to have been blind and our fleet commanders stupid.

          However even though pulling them out of mothballs and decking them out with new weapons and electronics would not be cost effective. I do see a possible use for them that would give the Russians some degree of force projection.

          Dumping the SA-N-6 and filling those 96 holes with a surface launched version of the Kh-55 Long range cruise missile with its 3,000 km range and probable 250kg conventional warhead might be an interesting alternative.

          The dimensions of the SA-N-6 and the Kh-55 seem to be similar In any case the the SA-N-6 rotary launchers on the Kirov 'look' as if they could handle a Kh-55 sized can easily enough.(just guessing here)


          And then they could replace the P-700 Granit missiles with the superior P-800 Oniks Anti Ship Missile or save some cash and effort and leave the P-700's in place. Additionally the loss of the SA-N-6's is insignificant because her escorts could provide long range covereage.


          P-800 Oniks

          Giving the ships a significant long range land attack capability might keep them gainfully employed until the ship building facilities at Saint Petersburg can start turning out the Admiral Kuznetsov sized aircraft carriers they have expressed a need and desire for. But that would be a rather expensive stop gap measure. And what will be their 21st century mission be..other than looking impressive and intimidating (they will never lose that).

          And there are a few questions about the Kirov's that have yet to be answered (at least I don't know the answers). The most important of which in my mind is:

          How much attention to detail was taken when they laid them up?

          The three inactive Kirovs have been as Dreadnought said 'pier queens' for quite some time now, if they were haphazardly preserved without enough dehumidifiers below decks and a poor active corrosion control program their condition could be in the 'bad' to 'miserable' range. Making their rebirth even less likely and expensive. And how were the reactors shut down de-fueled and preserved? Considering the Chaos that reigned in Russia for years after the fall I think it is probable that they were simply 'parked' shutdown and abandoned for a few years at least. (speculation on my part here)



          Originally posted by Kato
          Or the bulkheads are constructed in such a way as to prevent immediate terminal damage to the missile launch containers, making it possible to just launch the whole load away from the ship in those 30 seconds or so you have until the fire from the missile explosion reaches it.
          Wowa! Now that would be something to see...96 missiles getting flushed simultaneously .... anything is possible.
          Last edited by Xbow; 18 Jul 11,, 02:15.

          Comment


          • #35
            Now that would be something to see...96 missiles getting flushed simultaneously .... anything is possible.

            IMO gents, I dont think that can happen if we consider a few of a few probables.

            Her fire control is doubtfully that far advanced for this purpose. According to literature on the P-800 it will require an airborne platform, coastal radar or even ships for midcoarse guidance to the target so Kirov cannot exactly aim those missles but put them in the general direction of the target unless within FC range. In other words the Kirov can launch them (simultanious 96 is very doubtful for obvious reasons such as mid air collision and range capability once launched) Kirov does its job of getting the missle/missles in the air and other vehicles provide guidance to target midcoarse. If the guidance to target is knocked out then you have no precise aiming on to the target and it would probably go into a search mode making it an somewhat easier target for countermeasures,ciws,ECM etc since it wont have a perfect attack path from a directed approach once out of Kirovs FCR range.

            This is also a prime reason why Sryia couldnt threaten anyone even if they recieved the missles from Russia which they purchased (or attempted to) since they lack the capability to forward guide them once launched over the horizion, they are left to Line of Sight targeting so that limits them greatly.

            The P-800 or Yakhont also cruises at a high altitude on its way to the target which also makes it vulnerable to interception (to some systems) and then dives below the horizion for its final run (at a preprogrammed height) so it really depends on the opposing Navy's tech and capabilities for it to achieve sucsess.

            Many believe these capabilities are no match for AEGIS or PAAMS systems. Also Russia herself really has not shown experience in launching coordinated attacks from ships in this form in the 20th century as of yet unless i have missed something (entirely possible). However AEGIS has as well as PAAMS in the 20th century.

            These are just a few reasons why investing the money at rebuild may not be such a great idea unless it has a directed mission and not just cruising around burning cash but hey if they have the money to spend....
            Last edited by Dreadnought; 18 Jul 11,, 06:14.
            Fortitude.....The strength to persist...The courage to endure.

            Comment


            • #36
              Or the bulkheads are constructed in such a way as to prevent immediate terminal damage to the missile launch containers, making it possible to just launch the whole load away from the ship in those 30 seconds or so you have until the fire from the missile explosion reaches it.

              IMO, You might get away the entire first salvo but doubtfull on the second within 30 seconds if you think of the mechanics at work alone (rotation in the launchers, safety's, programming etc) not to mention FCR, tracking and operations interfacing. Just saying.
              Fortitude.....The strength to persist...The courage to endure.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by Dreadnought
                You might get away the entire first salvo but doubtfull on the second within 30 seconds if you think of the mechanics at work alone (rotation in the launchers, safety's, programming etc) not to mention FCR, tracking and operations interfacing. Just saying.
                I doubt that in the even't of a hit in the P-700 missile gallery that they would get any of those hummers off in any productive way. Although they might be able to flush the whole rack away from the ship as a damage control measure rather quickly. But realistically, I doubt that they could even open all twenty doors and prep the missiles for emergency 'burial as sea' firing in 30 seconds.

                And as for the SA-N-6 Gallery it appears that only 12 of those 96 missiles could be fired away from the ship as an emergency measure at any one time thus leaving the remainder to cook off. You mentioned the time it would take for the rotary launchers to cycle into the firing position. Well, I can't imagine it being faster than ~ten seconds to rotate the magazine, power up the missile and fire it. A lot can happen in ten seconds or even one second when explosives and solid rocket fuel are involved. The reason I said 10 seconds is because at that rate the SA-N-6 battery could fire all of its missiles in 80 seconds. Of course they could never handle that many missiles in flight at the same time.

                No, a hit in either gallery means a lot of secondary explosions below decks. Their only hope is that the blast from secondaries will be directed outward.

                And as you mentioned the mission profile of a swarm of P-700s/P-800s is complex and requires downrange guidance from either a sub, surface vessel or aircraft. Its interesting that in a swarm of those one missile will pop up to high altitude to receive and send information to a remote station. That missile then transmits command signals and target designation data to the rest of the gang that will be riding the waves. If the 'command' missile is eliminated then the next missile in the 'chain of command' will pop up and assume the control duty.

                To me a system like that would be excessively vulnerable to countermeasures from point intercept to an EMP attack via a small nuclear weapon or possibly even a powerful Flux Compression Generator pumped by a conventional explosive. Since those missiles are constantly sending and receiving data they would have to have an antenna up and the EMP would connect with its internals via Front Door Coupling. Radar and communications gear are particularly vulnerable to that type of attack.

                For these reasons and more I never thought for minute that the Kirov's had a snowballs chance in hell of neutralizing our carriers. Oh they might have nailed one before the bulk of their fleet was sunk and the remainder retreated to port. At which point those stationary ships would have received constant attention from TLAMs.

                And for many of the same reasons I think the threat of DF-21 Anti Ship ballistic missile threat falls into the P-700/P-800 category only more so. The ability to detect and execute such an attack against a carrier at sea is something the Chinese have not even remotely demonstrated even in training.
                This post by Loren B. Thompson, Ph.D. is interesting
                Last edited by Xbow; 18 Jul 11,, 12:50.

                Comment


                • #38
                  The ability to detect and execute such an attack against a carrier at sea is something the Chinese have not even remotely demonstrated even in training.

                  Agreed, many state they have "carrier killers" but the question always comes shortly thereafter of just how to you plan to not only find one at sea and defeat all of its protection but to sink it unders its AEGIS umbrella from its CVBG. Same thing, no guidance to target and all you have is expensive fireworks and more junk lying at the bottom of the ocean. Plus the fact that Chinese carriers are sitting ducks at their bases as compared to USN carriers at sea.

                  The USN knows what it will take to sink a carrier (they have sunk many from WWII forward) and built their CVN's with that knowledge in mind. The Chinese and Iranians have zippo in experience in that area.

                  Iran is also suspect of buying these or their tech under the very same impressions. Same story.
                  Fortitude.....The strength to persist...The courage to endure.

                  Comment


                  • #39


                    Of course we have no defense then or now!

                    Originally posted by Dreadnought View Post
                    many state they have "carrier killers" but the question always comes shortly thereafter of just how to you plan to not only find one at sea and defeat all of its protection but to sink it unders its AEGIS umbrella from its CVBG...

                    Iran is also suspect of buying these or their tech under the very same impressions. Same story.
                    I agree. The folks that wax poetically about fleet Carrier being a dead duck in the light of the threat posed by the DF-21d and the Khalij Fars always omit a few critical details. And that is that the missile is just the tip of the iceberg. China and Iran both lack sufficient satellite coverage and air search capability to detect a battle groups at sea with any degree of reliability.

                    There are a lot of moving parts involved in using ballistic missiles with conventional warheads to knock out ships at sea. large over the horizon radar systems, multiple satellites, surface ships, aircraft etc. And all of those are vulnerable to destruction or counter measures. And I dare say that we have more RIM-161 SM-3s than China will ever have DF-21d's or the Iranians Khalij Fars. And we can knock out their satellites faster than they can put them up.

                    Is the threat real? Yes it is. But its nice to know that our guys are way ahead of the power curve on this one . In a war with China I doubt they would have a single satellite up and running at the end of day one. And I don't think they are going to be able to switch on those big over the horizon search radars with out consequence.

                    All this hype is actually reminiscent of the 1880's when the dreaded 'Whitehead Automobile Torpedo' and the Torpedo Boat spelled impending doom for the battleship and all large combatants. Torpedo boats were going to give 'Lesser Nations' the ability to rumble on a level playing field with nations that had large battle fleets. Well it didn't happen. In those days the counter measures were the Torpedo Boat Destroyer, torpedo blisters, nets, rapid fire secondary guns and better fire direction and control.

                    The difference is that the torpedo presented a more real threat to the capital ships of the day than the ASBM does for capital ships today. If for no other reasons than: they were cheap, to be had in large numbers, and required very few collateral assets to make them work.



                    The 1880's version of the Dong-Feng ASBM?

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by Xbow View Post


                      Of course we have no defense then or now!


                      I agree. The folks that wax poetically about fleet Carrier being a dead duck in the light of the threat posed by the DF-21d and the Khalij Fars always omit a few critical details. And that is that the missile is just the tip of the iceberg. China and Iran both lack sufficient satellite coverage and air search capability to detect a battle groups at sea with any degree of reliability.

                      There are a lot of moving parts involved in using ballistic missiles with conventional warheads to knock out ships at sea. large over the horizon radar systems, multiple satellites, surface ships, aircraft etc. And all of those are vulnerable to destruction or counter measures. And I dare say that we have more RIM-161 SM-3s than China will ever have DF-21d's or the Iranians Khalij Fars. And we can knock out their satellites faster than they can put them up.

                      Is the threat real? Yes it is. But its nice to know that our guys are way ahead of the power curve on this one . In a war with China I doubt they would have a single satellite up and running at the end of day one. And I don't think they are going to be able to switch on those big over the horizon search radars with out consequence.

                      All this hype is actually reminiscent of the 1880's when the dreaded 'Whitehead Automobile Torpedo' and the Torpedo Boat spelled impending doom for the battleship and all large combatants. Torpedo boats were going to give 'Lesser Nations' the ability to rumble on a level playing field with nations that had large battle fleets. Well it didn't happen. In those days the counter measures were the Torpedo Boat Destroyer, torpedo blisters, nets, rapid fire secondary guns and better fire direction and control.

                      The difference is that the torpedo presented a more real threat to the capital ships of the day than the ASBM does for capital ships today. If for no other reasons than: they were cheap, to be had in large numbers, and required very few collateral assets to make them work.



                      The 1880's version of the Dong-Feng ASBM?
                      Agreed, not to mention you might want to move your regimes headquarters and other military/nuclear assets to Mars because chances are for attacking an American Carrier and a battlegroup your going to land about there at the end of the day anyway.

                      And then after all is said and done have the USN,USMC and USAF in the area for quite sometime afterwards to retrieve whatever may have been lost which equates to US presence 24/7/365. But do rest assure more then just the twice the equivalent will be extracted from them in return without doubt.;)
                      Last edited by Dreadnought; 19 Jul 11,, 04:17.
                      Fortitude.....The strength to persist...The courage to endure.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by Dreadnought View Post
                        Agreed, not to mention you might want to move your regimes headquarters and other military/nuclear assets to Mars because chances are for attacking an American Carrier and a battlegroup your going to land about there at the end of the day anyway.

                        And then after all is said and done have the USN,USMC and USAF in the area for quite sometime afterwards to retrieve whatever may have been lost which equates to US presence 24/7/365. But do rest assure more then just the twice the equivalent will be extracted from them in return without doubt.;)
                        :) Mars sounds about right...assuming we didn't send a few high performance rovers armed with a few Javelin missiles (modified for exo-atmospheric flight) and a .50 cal machine gun with an excellent muzzle break and recoil system to punch holes in the tin can that the PRC's leadership would be occupying.


                        JPL control, This is Mars Viper 1, have engaged and destroyed one PRC habitat vicinity of Aki crater, Continuing Mission....OUT!

                        Yes, If they managed to somehow take out a carrier by any means they would wish they hadn't very quickly. I would estimate their potential losses in ships, aircraft, coastal and port facilities at more than a trillion (with conventional weapons). After that we would see how long China keeps the tough kid on the block attitude with no means of transporting goods to market or receiving shipments of Black Gold...except from Russia which would be glad to gouge them mercilessly for every drop.
                        Last edited by Xbow; 20 Jul 11,, 09:43.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          The return of Peter the Great's counterparts

                          Ilya Kramnik
                          RusData Dialine - Russian Press Digest
                          September 22, 2011
                          The Defense Ministry has decided to restore the world's most powerful nuclear-powered cruisers, the Project 1144 Orlans, by turning them into cross-functional missile ships capable of performing various tasks at sea, such as destroying aircraft carriers, countering air strikes, and striking land-based targets using strategic cruise missiles. Three varieties of cross-functional cruisers, Admiral Nakhimov, Admiral Lazarev and Kirov, were removed from operations 20 years ago, and only one battleship, Pyotr Velikiy (Peter the Great), the flagship of the Northern Fleet, continued going out to the sea.

                          A source in the military-industrial complex told Izvestia that the updated Orlan cruisers will be equipped with modern radio electronics, radar, control and communication systems, and means of electronic warfare. In addition, the body frames and nuclear power units will be repaired.

                          "All of these measures will help extend these ships' service life to the 2030-2040s," said Izvestia's interlocutor.

                          The main update will be modernized armaments: Granit missiles will be replaced with the latest cross-functional ship-based firing systems, which can be loaded with a variety of missiles from anti-submarine torpedo rockets to long-range cruise missiles. The cruisers' ammunition reserve will increase from 20 to 80 missiles due to the compactness of the systems, said a Navy representative.

                          These launch canisters could be used for Onyx and Kalibr missiles, which will be the main weapons used against aircraft carriers. In addition, the cruisers' air defense capabilities will be improved: Orlans will be equipped with the latest S-400 air defense system and new close-combat air defense systems.

                          In total, Orlans will carry over 300 different types of missiles, including cruise missiles, and will be the most powerful missile carriers in the world.

                          Military officials believe that powerful attack forces, capable of withstanding the power of aircraft carrier groups, could be created around these ships.

                          "By having two cruisers with nuclear power units, and an aircraft carrier in the Northern Fleet, as well as new frigates and submarines, which we are currently building, we are getting a very powerful attack force in the Atlantic," a source in the Defense Ministry told Izvestia.

                          The scheme of modernization of Orlans will be applied to Admiral Nakhimov, on which experts began working this year. The Navy is expected to get this ship in 2015, after which the fate of the remaining Project 1144 ships - Admiral Lazarev, Kirov, and Peter the Great - will be decided.

                          However, military experts are still confused as to why the Russian Navy needs such powerful ships. Konstantin Makienko, deputy director of the Center for the Analysis of Strategies and Technologies, told Izvestia that, so far, Orlans do not fit into a single scenario of application of Russian battleships.

                          "This type of ship cannot be involved in the possible conflicts that we may have in the Caucasus and Central Asia, and in the case of a hypothetical war with NATO or Japan, it will still be destroyed as the enemy has a much greater numerical superiority at sea," Makienko explained to Izvestia.

                          At the same time, the Russian Navy will not be able to ensure Russia's military presence on the oceans without large battleships. Therefore, the rehabilitation of the Orlans continues to be the best options for strengthening the Russian Navy in the short-term.

                          Copyright 2011 Russica Izvestia InformationAll Rights Reserved
                          RusData Dialine - Russian Press Digest



                          **Key words here "carrier killer" like we havent heard this enough. From the Chinese and now the Russians.

                          What carriers have they "killed"? Not one to my knowledge.

                          "Body frames and nuclear plant repaired"? Translation....patch up work. If they have to repair body frames then by most means the strutural integrity of the ship comes to question and according to the article the nuclear plants will be "repaired". It will be interesting to watch them try to revive nuclear reactors that have been dormant for a very long time (20 years) and were troubled even when the last one was in service.

                          From what the article suggests the material condition of the other three has not even been determined as of yet. One has been known to be picked over for parts for sometime now.

                          And last but not least the "Battleship" tag comes up again. These ships were NEVER meant to fight a close quarters battle and would launch their weapons from a few hundred miles away.

                          Sorry, but IMO. Hardly worthy of the label "battleship".

                          Putin must be printing his own money, or this is happening due to the Chinese and Indian building programs at present.
                          Last edited by Dreadnought; 23 Sep 11,, 16:54.
                          Fortitude.....The strength to persist...The courage to endure.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Speaking of Putin, it looks like he is coming back to power in reality soon!

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X