An aside set of questions for anybody to answer (RSM-55 please help me 😀 )
877
BIUS, the 877 uses the Uzel BIUS system around three digital computers of the MVU-110EM series. Those computers run at 100 KOPS and software is wrote in assembler language. According to what I have been able to research, Uzel’s MMI on 877 compromises a single operator manning two consoles, one of those is for controlling the MGK-400M Rubikon-M bow cillyndrical sonar systems and other asociated systems through a CRT display, the other one is just switches and buttons for working other systems.
System weight is 2.8 tonnes and volume of 3.5 m3 consuming a total of 3 kW of electric power.
BIUS “Uzel” allows to keep automatic TMA tracks of up to two targets to be attacked at the same time, ballistic data entered manually and ballistic solutions produced automatically. In the tactical data handling role, another three targets could be tracked manually, introducing ballistic info and plotting it into TMA process.
A pic of what appears to be console interface of Uzel:
(Russian Paltus, maybe one of the last 8 “877”?)
And
(Indian 877EKM)
Now, some questions regarding Uzel:
a) What it’s exactly is?, in functions how it compares to western control systems (maybe like CCS Mk1 or Mk 117 onboard the first Los Angeles class SSN), ok Uzel is a pretty simple system by soviet standards (accord to some things I have read, it’s considered a toy compared to Omnibus installed on big fat nuke boats), but what I would like to know is exactly “what it does”, controlling the sonar systems through the CRT seems obvious, but:
a.1) What is the interface for the tactical data handling process (Target Motion Analysis for determining true bearing, range, course, speed, etc)?, the same CRT for handling the sonar systems?
a.2) The info about “it tracks automatically x targets and manually y targets” it corresponds to the TMA process and is separated from the sonar tracks?
a.3) Did Uzel controls the torpedo launching systems (for the last 8 boats that means the wire-guided torpedoes that could be launch from two tubes) including the running of the wires (command directions via wires), the reload process of the automatical system of reloading, and the Built-in-test procedures and checks?. So that basically the Uzel operator could launch a torpedo and prepares other ones himself without outside asistance?, they’re back-ups (say other consoles where this work could be undergone aside of Uzel interfase)…don’t you think it’s too much of a load for a single guy with swtiches and buttons?
a.4) Did Uzel takes into account any navigational functions of the sub?, I’m sure it takes into account navigational input from the submarine’s navigation systems to do the TMA process, but did the Uzel operator involves in navigation actions?..basically did Uzel allows him to give basic commands to the sub (“rudder left x degrees, make my depth y, make my speed z”)?
a.5) Is’nt Uzel overloading the operator?, per example in our U209A-1200 SSK boats here in Venezuela, we use the ISUS-83-23 control system, such a system is manned by 4 guys and 3 of them controls the different sonar sustems (bow cyllindrical array, hull array, interception array, active array…) they also get tactical information for preparing TMA, they get the batythermographic information and the ray theory processed into sound propagation paths grafically (say here you have convergence zones, here you have direct paths, here you have bottom losses, plus of course the Prop-Loss Curves)…with four guys taking control of the combat functions of the sub, and two-three of them only sonar system you can control Sonar Watches a lot better, control your systems a lot better and do not overload the operator as it seems you’re doing into Uzel…what do you think?, check that big fat boats like Victor-III (671RTMK) have three sonar consoles into its BIUS (accord to Combat Fleets of the world 2002-2003, but they fails into the name of the BIUS calling it “Varyag” :p )…I myself consider that Uzel is heavily overloading the operator with info no matter of the aumotization of the system…what do you think?.
a.6) Did Uzel’s interfase is used for controlling the radar and ESM systems of the sub?, so such data inputs would be introduced for improving TMA tracks and solutions?
a.7) In the 877 PL the whole submarine could be controlled from GKP (Main Command Post) as is the case with the 705 “Lira” using the MVU-111 “Akkord” BIUS and the other systems?
a.8) Did basic MGK-400M Rubikon-M uses LOFAR acoustic processing?, in wich frequency did MGK-400M Rubikon-M works?, how’s the MMI of the sonar display?, waterfall with different time-story settings for broadband and grams for narrow-band/LOFAR (if any?), or a FRAZ for both (if they have both capabilities off course)?
a.9) Did the skipper have any sort of Control Central Display Pannel for the skipper or officer on deck (like this one that is part of Mk 113 or 117 FCS IIRC from american SSN boats) for tactical understanding of the situation?
(Like this:)
This panel displays information that helps the commanding officer (or officer of the deck) to understand the tactical situation of the submerged submarine; it also holds the means of communicating his orders to the crew. The major displays and controls are the: (1) selectable sonar displays from the sonar room (upper left); (2) under-ice sonar display (upper middle); (3) time bearing plot/maneuvering display (upper right); (4) ship’s course indicator (middle); (5) underwater communications control system (lower right); (6) internal ship communications controls (middle and lower right); and (7) emergency sound powered phone system (lower left).
In the indian pics of their Shindhugosh I seen this pic it calls my attention, check the Indian Skipper is using the attack periscope, maybe is a similar system?
636 Improved Kilo
Did the first 636 Kilo for export (like the first ones delivered to China without the Klub-S capability) mantains the same MGK-400M Rubikon-M sonar system (or export derivative) from 877/877E/877EKM?, and the same Uzel BIUS system?
636M
Last developed Paltus class of PL, accord to Rosoboronexport, they introduces the improved acoustical digital processing MGK-400EM “Rubikon-EM” sonar system, involving improved sonar hydropohones and transducers,improved accoustic signal processing and all the know bla bla bla we know.
What calls my attention its that it also introduces a totally new MMI interface with two new consoles each with two flat panel displays (TFT?)…question is, such displays replace the old Uzel interfase I have shown, in fact those consoles are part of a new BIUS itself?, or are they only for controlling the sonar systems?…if so that would mean that a new BIUS with new computers (bye bye MVU-110EM) would be used with new capabilities?…Rosoboronexport page gives information of up to 12 sonar target tracks, and up to 2 DEMON/LOFAR analysis (don’t ask me to chear out about those numbers :rolleyes:)
If that’s part of a new BIUS it cooperates with the 3R14N-11356 fire control system of the Kalibr-PLE system (Klub-S control system)?
What is the Palladij-M “Integrated Platform Management System” developed by OAO Avrora? (A BIUS?, something else?, I’m sure is situated at GKP)…
Well and last and last, is there any info about Litiy BIUS system for 677 submarine?, is developed by whom?, Avrora?
Thanks a lot for any answer RSM-55 :p 🙂
Sign In
