Project-06363: Finally a New Start?!

Is there anyone who know (if any) about any new electric motors being produced in Russia for naval use? I mean more powerful (& larger in diameter) than what is currently installed in pr.677?

Finally someone else also noticed what I was mentioning….the Pr.06363 (atleast on the plate) have its hydrodynamic hull similar to the Pr.677

http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showpost.php?p=1825103&postcount=429

Xposting from RuN thread.

By the way, is it just me, or does this submarine looks awfully similar to the lada class….

No its just not you….I felt the same and hence thought of giving the Pr.06363 an independent space for recognition. Which is this thread.

But there is confusion as can be seen from all the printed material (banner behind) & model displayed even during the ceremony. And its a totally different case with the engraved profile on the plate. I don’t know if this “confusion” was created deliberately.

As of now I’d take the plate to be the truth and as I mentioned months ago….few more years and we’ll get to know if this is going to be the new Kilo and RuN’s future SSK**. I had also mentioned that RuN might not be interested in a single-hull sub after all these years of double-hulled designs.

** Pr.06363 have already become the future SSK for Russian Navy and almost 10 is to be build by 2020 (if what I read is right). I had predicted a figure of 12 Kilos somewhere in the last RuN thread….and said that 3 could be just the initial order.

It’s not really new. As far as I know, the major difference between 636 and 636.3 is in its armament (Club-S/Kalibr-PL).

Also, I understand that NATO designation for project 636 is “Improved Kilo”, while “Kilo” designates project 877. So, technically, they are two different classes.

Naturally, there are some differences form one batch to another, even in the same project.

Indian, Chinese kilos already have those…

how did the designation even come. I’m talking about the project-06363. Its a further development of Kilo with seemingly considerable difference from the older 636.

See batch difference will be there. But a a batch difference does not come to a completely new hull profile. If that is a batch difference, then I’d consider that as a completely new “batch”.

Improved Kilo class belongs to 3rd generation.

but the 06363 is not the improved Kilo, but will be an “improved”-improved kilo.

Also, it’s basically an export oriented version. Current plans to purchase some 636.3s for the Black Sea Fleet came to being because of problems with Lada class.

see my reply to TR1…

Unlikely.

a lower crew can be achieved by eliminating the extras with automation. Moreover, it is also possible that the 06363 is a “lada inside” with a new larger hull. see abobe reply to TR1.

What increased volume?

yes, didn’t you notice it before? Try it again with the sectional drawing and you will be able to see it as well. If not I’ll try to post a comparison when time permits.

So what you are saying, is by installing a bigger propeller, you are increasing the performance? So why to install a small propeller in the first place?

I’m sorry if my questions sound stupid – I’m genuinely don’t get the logic.

are you seriously trying to prove that you have not seen the propeller of a kilo class?? The 877 had a 6-blade propeller with smaller diameter where as the succeeding Kilos 636 got the newer 7-blade propeller with a larger diameter. And I believe these propellers had their origins in the propellers of the Pr971..

to the question of why, i’ll reply in a different way…

I don’t know which part of the world you live in. But the part of the globe where I live every household have ceiling fan. Now more lower consumption fans (50W) are available with 3-4-5 leafs. So lets try some simple example (do it yourself kit, I’d say).

Since air like water is a fluid, but of much lower density, we’ll be able to understand the basics.

Take two 50w fans (4 leaf/blade). One with a smaller blade and another with a larger diameter blade. Now operate it only at a lower speed and see for yourself if the smaller diameter blade or the larger diameter blade is giving you more air-flow.

my understanding is that the larger blade will be giving you more. And what about the meter reading??…..naturally the consumption will be 50w/h (or the time used) but the more efficient of the two will be the one with a larger diameter one.

Are you serious? SSBN and SSK share the same propeller?

To a propeller it does not matter from where the shaft it is connected to is getting its power. Can you tell me the difference between the propellers of the French N-powered Rubis class & the diesel-electric Scorpene class??

Kilo can’t accommodate any VLS silos without major redesign. Klub-S system missiles are already on the 636.3 – no need for a VLS.

Rubin have already designed a VLS for the lada class and hopefully they might be having one for the Kilos as well. Maybe we’ll see it on the Vietnamese kilos..

636.3 have been exported for some time now, and 636 around the world have been upgraded to 636.3 standard. But that’s only because there are delays with LadaAmur and relatively low costs (in comparison to western SSKs).

so are you telling that there won’t be any change from the older 636?

As I said before, probably the only reason for building Kilos for the Black Sea Fleet is the delays and misfortunes of the Lada class. As soon as Lada will get through all the needed trials and improvements, 636 production for the Russian Navy will be discontinued, and 677 will be produced instead and, eventually, replace existing 877s and 636s. Project 636.3 will not be the next standard Russian SSK.

see my reply to TR1. I don’t see much of a future for lada in RuN. Not because it being a bad submarine, but basically because RuN will most likely go for the larger double-hulled 06363. I see all the possiblity of lada getting sidelined and basically only for export.

Production of the Lada class has been on hold because of the problems that were discovered during the trials (and probably also because of the insufficient funding in previous years). Now there is, it seems, a great effort going on to assure its readiness for the induction into the Russian Navy.

There should not be any double that lada will come out with all problems fixed. But its chances of being the next standard conventional submarine of a Navy who is so used to larger double-hulled submarine looks dim.

Thanks for your ideas Jang.

Another thing is the speed of construction- the boat is planned to be handed over in 2013- that seems to indicate it is not the first of a kind!

Yes, the boat is to be handed out in 2013 and in just 2 years we can see if what I said was right or wrong!.

But I’m basing my opinion on the plate during the laying down ceremony and that shows a completely different profile than what is known for the Kilo 636. As far as I’m considered the plates don’t Lie.

We saw that in earlier cases as well. Consider the case of project-22350. Before the plate, it was some other drawing that was speculated. The same case with Borei class untill the plate came online.

It could be a modest improvement over the 636 though and still achieve that timescale.

I could be a modest improvement. But clearly that modesty doesn’t show itself in the outer profile of the submarine that has been laid.

The 06363 came at a time when lada is still in testing. Lada as the leasd ship will definetely have problems and that is natural. But they will definetely sort it out and she will be operational service. But I really don’t think Lada have a future in the RuN who is so used to bigger double-hulled Kilo class. So in all posiblity even after the first lada completes her tests, we may not see her as the primary diesel-electric submarine of the Russian Navy.

It is also possible that the 06363 is indeed a lada from the inside. It means the inner hull structre, equipmets etc have been retained with a new bigger outer hull. After all the Kilo’s internal hull is just as much as the Lada and “cramped” to the aft section!

I have seen some insiders from Vietnam claimed that the Kilo that will be built for Vietnam could be fitted with AIP fuel cells.

Yes it could be true.

The 6 submarine is for $1.8 billion where as the total cost is around $3.6billion and it mentions the additional amount is for setting up the entire support needed for the submarines. And considering the cost involved, the AIP coastal facilities looks to be among them!

They also said that there is a strong possibility that the last 2/4 of the Kilo that Vietnam ordered could be fitted with VLS.
But it’s just claim so far ;

VLS module is not something that cannot be installed and Rubin definetely would have worked on it. Rubin have a VLS for the lada class with an impressive just 2 minutes 😮 for firing the entire volume of 10 missiles. Even a tailing submarine (~3km) won’t have its torpedoes reach the submarines before the entire volume have been fired. Vietnam could be the first customer that we may see.

Now, considering the 6 Vietnamese submarine and the 3 project-06363 submarines for Russia i feel that Vietnam & Russia may have ordered the same submarine. It is also possible that Russia gave a follow-on order to the submarines that is being built for Vietnam. If that is that case, Vietnamese submarines could also be of the project-06363 class.

Project-06363: Finally a New Start?!

Since no one have come forward with any post or speculation regarding the project-06363, It would be safe & correct to assume that no one noticed the new project-06363 Kilo class…

It’s not really new. As far as I know, the major difference between 636 and 636.3 is in its armament (Club-S/Kalibr-PL).

Also, I understand that NATO designation for project 636 is “Improved Kilo”, while “Kilo” designates project 877. So, technically, they are two different classes.

Naturally, there are some differences form one batch to another, even in the same project.

1) Project-06363 visually resembles an enlarged Lada/Amur class. A natural progression in the development of Kilo class was expected, but the icing on the cake is that the new Kilo class might have evolved much better than expected by incorporating all the technological developments carried for the Lada class. This also means Russia now have TWO 4-Gen diesel-electric submarine class.

Improved Kilo class belongs to 3rd generation.

Also, it’s basically an export oriented version. Current plans to purchase some 636.3s for the Black Sea Fleet came to being because of problems with Lada class.

2) Pr.06363 is likely to have almost identical combat management systems & automation like the Lada class. Due to this there is a possiblity of the sub having fewer crew than the current Kilos. A crew of 35-40 maybe a safe figure. Lada class have 35 crew (2/3-shifts).

Unlikely.

3) Due to tapering to the aft in the earlier kilo class, the compartments at that area were of lower volume. This did have few disadvantages in the sense that it limited the installation of larger electric motors for propulsion. Now with increased volume, the deck is cleared for installation (if required) of larger motors & diesel engines, which will have a direct impact on the performance of the sub.

What increased volume?

4) One of the key features that aided in the performance of newer Kilo636 over the 877 are their Propellers, in addition to the more power diesel units. Skewed propeller is a good one for silence, but there is more to a propeller than the silence and that is thrust. It is the diameter of the propeller. An increased diameter propeller means much larger volume of fluid is being pushed out giving the submarine increased forward thrust for the same work done. This efficiency will aid in improving the range.

So what you are saying, is by installing a bigger propeller, you are increasing the performance? So why to install a small propeller in the first place?

I’m sorry if my questions sound stupid – I’m genuinely don’t get the logic.

Is it possible that the propeller from the Yasen class is shared with the new 06363 in the future?? Or maybe it could be of a diameter that is in between the the current pr.636 & Yasen.

Are you serious? SSBN and SSK share the same propeller?

5) Since the Kilo have one of the largest hull diameters, it can accomodate any of the VL silos that Russia have for underwater weapons. With a hull diameter of 9.9m, there would hardly be any hump on a Kilo fitted with a VLS for Yakhont/Klub etc. These VLS have a max height/length of around 8.9 meters (if I’m not wrong).

Kilo can’t accommodate any VLS silos without major redesign. Klub-S system missiles are already on the 636.3 – no need for a VLS.

Like the Kilo class set standards in terms of automation, firepower, stealth etc when it was introduced…Project-06363 might just be another standard the Russians have set for the diesel-electric heavy weights. Now lets wait for the days when the submarine is launched and is inducted into service.

636.3 have been exported for some time now, and 636 around the world have been upgraded to 636.3 standard. But that’s only because there are delays with LadaAmur and relatively low costs (in comparison to western SSKs).

We have all heard that 3 Kilo class submarines will be built at Baltic for the Russian Navy. Now Itz is my speculation that the project-06363 may be going to be the mainstay of the Russian Navy’s conventional submarines and will be complimenting & then later on succeeding the earlier Kilos. This could be one of the main reason why the production of the Lada has been slowed down. Amur may in the future be sidelined for RuN and may remain only for export… probably the first signs of it are the Russo-Italian sub based on Amur…

As I said before, probably the only reason for building Kilos for the Black Sea Fleet is the delays and misfortunes of the Lada class. As soon as Lada will get through all the needed trials and improvements, 636 production for the Russian Navy will be discontinued, and 677 will be produced instead and, eventually, replace existing 877s and 636s. Project 636.3 will not be the next standard Russian SSK.

Production of the Lada class has been on hold because of the problems that were discovered during the trials (and probably also because of the insufficient funding in previous years). Now there is, it seems, a great effort going on to assure its readiness for the induction into the Russian Navy.

I have seen some insiders from Vietnam claimed that the Kilo that will be built for Vietnam could be fitted with AIP fuel cells.
They also said that there is a strong possibility that the last 2/4 of the Kilo that Vietnam ordered could be fitted with VLS.
But it’s just claim so far 😉

Thanks for your ideas Jang.

Another thing is the speed of construction- the boat is planned to be handed over in 2013- that seems to indicate it is not the first of a kind! It could be a modest improvement over the 636 though and still achieve that timescale.

We might see the number of crews getting scaled down in the new boat.
& Kilo class propeller comparisons.

I was under the impression it was an emergency reaction to the inevitability of the BSF almost disappearing due to age, and for the sake of timely introduction, was an up-to-date 636.

It is natural to think like that at the first look. But when I observed the plate, I first thought they did a mistake by engraving a Lada/amur class instead of the Kilo 636 on it. But soon it became clear that it was a brand new Kilo class. A natural progression. 🙂

Since last time I’d to leave in between and completed the post in a hurry, I couldn’t include all that I wanted to. So I’m modifying the original post. Hope noone would mind.

Now the only question is will the Russian Govt at least provide the required funds to built enough of these submarines.

JangBoGo, I am not engaged in drawings of submarines. Here it is possible talk to people which can to help you:

http://paralay.iboards.ru/viewtopic.php?p=126982#p126982

http://forums.airbase.ru/2011/03/t64596,71–chertezhi-podvodnykh-lodok-2.7095.html

Thanks buddy for your effort & help! 🙂

Russia exists some millenia, it is not necessary to worry about such trifles 🙂

I was under the impression it was an emergency reaction to the inevitability of the BSF almost disappearing due to age, and for the sake of timely introduction, was an up-to-date 636.

JangBoGo, I am not engaged in drawings of submarines. Here it is possible talk to people which can to help you:

http://paralay.iboards.ru/viewtopic.php?p=126982#p126982

http://forums.airbase.ru/2011/03/t64596,71–chertezhi-podvodnykh-lodok-2.7095.html