PitObvious alternative is: buying Mistral, add in house Lesorub-E.
SIC-21 communication system is separate from SENIT-9 CDS system on Mistral, SIC-21 coud be buy in license form (or something similar) and installed on russian ships so to made them compatible between them and Mistraliski.
Or they could not care a damn, and buy the darn ship as french as the Eiffel Tower, and **** the hell with the conversion courses at France, for the enjoy and happiness of the russian navy officers and sailors involved :D;)
PitZIL:
Sigma-E is scalable, from Corvette (20380) configuration to destroyer escort (956). In fact, marketing photos show a 956, and I have readen its intended for upgrades of such ships.
I have read those internet links, thanks, now, please read what Friedman said in his 2006 book:
Lesorub-E is scaled up Sigma-E, adapted to command and control capabilities for aircraft carrying ships. They share similar hardware, and similar operational modes, but Lesorub-E is more complete.
Trebovaniye-M is in similar segment to Sigma-E, but from different manufacturer.
Russians compare Lesorub-E to SENIT-8, but you should go and compare the specs. You should also compare the specs of Sigma-E, to, per example, TACTICOS.
Yes, its probable, im not sure through, that those BIUS/ABSU uses western hardware, like the LCD of the MFCC, or the processors of them, or god knows what. But that doesnt change the fact that they should be compatible between them (at least Lesorub-E and Sigma-E are offered with X band directional data link of high output), doubt is with the rest of the fleet.
Buying a Mistral with SENIT-8, is ilogical, if you want to use the ship as command ship, you would not command anything in the modern way, because you would not receive data from other platform: datalinks are not compatible.
You can program software (can you?, would they, the french, let you?) of SENIT-8 to accomodate for russian made radars on the ship, russian made weapons, and russian made datalinks and communications systems, from HF, VHF, UHF, SATTCOM voice, to data (pure text, like data-mail) or target tracks (tactical data)…I consider that, just too much ambitious and difficult…have the Russians has anything similar from their own production?…
Soviet deployed C2 ships, and even, Kuznetsov, Kiev, and Kirov class are known as command ships (for pro-SSBN forces and for anti-CVBG forces) controllying fleet assets, ground assets, assesing info, and disseminating it.
But those are just my doubts.;)
PitIm leaving now, so will return to this nice chat later, but here is an interesting point:
By mid 2009, after most of the problems of Proekt 677 were hot (not only sonar Lira, but CDS Lythium and main electrical engines output), RuN authorities said that they will only buy 8 boats of this class in the future.
Now, younger Kilo in service now, is just 20 years old, and some of them are getting upgrades, but most of them, no.
Just 8 Lada for replacing so much Kilo boats?.
I think, just my humble opinion, that they will try an improved 677 sometimes later (maybe call it 677M, irony is not something outside russian flavour), correcting Sankt Petesburg problems, and putting into service…
After all, even Sankt Petesburg corresponds to a 90s design.
Remember that even Severodinsk is getting an upgrade program (in the form of Kazan) so its Borey. Most of those projects have been runing for so much time, that some technological basis is just TOO old.
Nerpa could be using a mix of MGK-400EM-E and Skat-3 technology, just per example (check the sonar panels, those are MGK-400EM-E)…
Fancy software processing and LCD stuff didnt existed by late 80s and early 90s…
PitFor serving as fleet flagship you need C3 system compatible with the SOVIET AND RUSSIAN ONES installed on board the myriad of current Russian vessels. You have to remember, that Soviet combat ships didnt have a common datalink, like per example, Link-11 was for American ships. Every generation of BIUS (combat direction system acronym in russian) brought its own datalink compatible between them. Per example, Kuznetsov, Baku, those Slava cruiser, the three last Kirov and Udaloy could work together using similar datalink, they all used a version of the Lesorub BIUS. But, Sovremenny didnt have a proper said BIUS, being Sapfir-U, was not a combat direction system, just a derivative of the Planshet system used on early vessels…if you go down, and look at different generation of surface vessel BIUS (Alliya-2, More, etc) all they have their own datalink patterns.
You need a command ship with C3 systems compatible with everyone…
And so, would you buy FRENCH hardware for that?…
Lesorub-E is a big ship BIUS, used for Vikramadtiya , in fact, they called it ABSU (like Lithium on 677) not BIUS. Sigma is a little ship combat direction system. Trebovodoniye-M is frigate one.
PitWell the problem with Russian links is they get lost in translation.
True.
The reason I find it weird is Sonar is the primary sensor of submarine and without a working or non operational sonar , the sub is virtually blind which may in worst situation risk her crew as well.
Its obvious that a sonar-less submarine is a non functional military asset. But the point is, if the sonar was found not working, and everything was fine, what could be done about that?, postponing the service entry till a sonar set worked as advised?, I think the russians showed a pragmatic approach: let the thing be in limited service, thats all. Your own link quote that.
Sometimes things get screwed on, didnt happened to Bark?, is not happening to Bulava?, so what?, could not happen to a submarines sonar?
What is so special about Lada sonar that they cannot make it work even after years of being under trials , any idea ?
Your link shows the most complete information about Lira, but doesnt mention the fails, it could be at any stage, from the piezoelectric hydrofone, to the signal processing, who knows.
I could understand suspicious about this, but, why in 10 years not a single Amur has been sold?, in 2006 we asked Amur, thats a public and notorious fact, because it happened on a maritime international trade show here in Caracas, with the, then, Navy CINC and ROE representative. And offer after offer, negotiation after negotiation, the last offer was, just a 636M, the only common combat system was the non penetrating periscope, but the requested, at some stage, Lithium CDS, was rejected, the instead offered Lama-EKM, and sonar MGK-400EM instead of Lira…
If the construction of the 677E Amur for export, have been cancelled at 47% and not continued since…what could you get?
If the construction of the sister boats stoped on 2006 when the last keel was laid, what could you think?, if we heard in 2009 that the sonar doesnt works, and the sister boats construction is frozen, what can you think?
I have also followed Snake65 participation on BRF under his other nickname, and he said it very clear, hes only echoing what is said in Russia…
PitAustin, not only Snake65 quoted that, but the Submariner Forum from Russia, one of the best internet sources quoted it too…
What do you find weird?
Daring was commisioned, and PAAMS doesnrt works, maybe for some years.
Udaloy and Vitseadmiral Kulakov, never had Kinzhal, and they were accepted for service.
Collins had notoriously unworking CDS and it was accepted anyway…
One thing is not having a functional main electrical engine, thats a no go fact for a submarine, submarines cant be used if their main electrical engines just doesnt work as adivsed. That was a problem on Sankt Petesburg, and it was solved…that was enough for allowing EXPERIMENTAL service entry.
When was the last time a new keel was laid down on this project?, 4 or 5 years ago?
What happened to those boats under construction…frozen construction or russian *Kulakov* style…some 18 years timeframe?
You posted days ago, links that supported and showed every kind of details on what has happened and what will happen. Sankt Petesburg was expected to be commisioned in September, without a sonar, but with functional main electrical engine and combat direction system…on experimental basis. They planned to made the tests May this year…thats not exactly what has happened?
PitSigma-E (per example, used on 22380) is years light behind Lesorub-E. Is a low end design. Check Friedman.
Its obiously that an LHD and an LST serves different roles, one of them deploy troops via vertical assault (helicopters) and serves as a platform for deploying AFV to the beach via LSM, or it avoids the establishment of the beach head (the so called ship-to-shore movement) and deploys the AFV directly to the objective using air cushion vehicles, like LCAC (or those nice russian ones), thats called STOM (ship to objective maneuver)…
Why not to continue STS?, because everybody is mining the litorals, and guarding the mined waters with coastal ASCM, and nobody wants an antiship missile to screw your day. Thats why modern amphibious doctrine calls for OTH assaults, and that means launching the troops via helicopter, and once the main oposition is neutralized, deploying the armor…
You cant do that with LST like Ivan Grein, Ropucha, Alligator, or similar. They need to reach the beaches, maybe some 100 meters from the shore, and deploy troops via LCU or raft boats, under fire…not a good idea, thats why everybody now focus on LPD and bigger LHA-LHD.
Now, Russian amphibioous doctrine is one short ranged, Jonesy had commented on it before, being short ranged (the Baltic operational base formed on the Cold War days by the East German, Polish, and Baltic Soviet Union naval installations, per example) means you can use quick amphibious assault means, like big air cushion vehicles to force the beachead or run directly to objective.
Do you remind the old thriller Red Storm Rising by Clancy?
The Fuzik acted like a big LPD, using the Lebed class air cushion vehicle to deploy the troops, not to a beachead where they ASSEMBLE and prepare to march towards their objective, but directly to the objective (Keflavik airbase and Reyjkavik airport), thats what STOM means. You cant do that with LST.
Changing in amphibious ships (Ivan Grein just to be one of a kind, those big Mistral) means that russkies are re-thinking their old Naval Infantry&anmphibious doctrine, they are not thinking only on those short ranged operations (no matter if theyre on Georgia from Crimean Peninsula, or to Denmark from the Baltic operational base in the good old days), they mean EXPEDITIONARY operations, along they new (or supposedly new) professional and compact army…
And thats something interesting to analyze.:D
PitAn oustanding fourth generation SSK, without a working sonar, and not designed with an AIP…thats what I call, notorious development, but judging the case of the Type 45s useless PAAM air defense system, or the whole glitches that suffered the combat direction system of the Collins class, at least the russians decided not to postpone forever the aceptance trials, and let the fish eat some water…
It doesnt matter that it would relies on old and proven periscope for detecting a warship (ah, yes, and radar!), but thats nothing for a XXI century boat :dev2:
PitIts absurd not to sell SIC-21 to the russians. French sold the system to Venezuela for the POVZEE and BVL designs of corvette and OPV. In fact, they sold a more advanced version, one naval comission of our navy visited the Mistral two years ago, to watch the system, and they bought an improved version (of course, adapted in size to smaller platform)
SENIT-8 derivative for LHD Mistral could well be sold in upgraded, but different version, lacking some of the NATO only stuff, like Link-16, and special SATTCOM stuff. I dont think Russians cant discuss installing, some up-scaled TACTICOS (more advanced than SENIT-8) instead of the above mentioned variant. SENIT-8 is the last one of that series of CDS, and it has carrier, LHD, frigate, destroyer, and corvette versions. They offered them for sale, why not to Russia?, if not, they can just go to Thales Nederland and get the other stuff, or even go to Italy and get IPN-S or similar. Yes, Lesorub-E is not that good compared to those above mentioned.
Russia lacks the experience to build this kind of vessel, but Ukraines Nikolayev yards had it in the past (Kuznetsov, Kiev, Minsk, Novorossys, Baku, et all)…Mistral is hell advanced vessel, highly automated…is really Severomorsk naval base up to task for receiving and manteining such ship?
CAST commented some months ago, the sale was political, Im reaching similar conclusions. Not because the Russian MIC lacks the capability to build a Mistral, but because, they dont have the need to had a Mistral, have had them, they would design AND CONSTRUCT a similar ship. In fact, Ivan Grein, a just one-of-kind ship, is a totally different (LST) concept, similar to those on the past.
Do russian navy bluff known why the russian appears not to be interested on more Ivan Grein?, have they discovered the world is round and that ship-to-shore movement is obsolete and theyre moving to Mistral to explore OTH OMFTS doctrines for amphibious operations?
Lots of question marks in this one.
PitAccor to same site, Gepard also uses active acoustic cancellation. The paragraph is the same for Gepard than Yasen…
It would be interesting why no pump-jet for Yasen :confused:
PitDecibels are meaningless unless they state the reference pressure used (micropascal, microbar) at what range (1 meter, or 1 yard), and the spectral density…
I guess Lada should be quiter than any Akula or Yasen, by god sake, is an electric boat đŽ
PitAustin, pure gold on 677 information:
The wonderful history of a submarine’s test…
Can I name 677 “Russian Collins”?, Collinski maybe đ
2005 g. December – first stage of the road tests BY [PL] âSaint Petersburgâ:.
2006 g. spring – planned in January 2006. by management the Navies the period of output [PL] âSaint Petersburgâ to the completing official tests with the subsequent inspection the Navy. [PL] left to the tests, but due to the state in August 2009. it is not yet accepted in the composition the Navy.
2006 g. summer – on [soobshcheniyamSMI] (http://lenta.ru) on [FGUP] âadmiralty shipyardsâ is laid [PL] of [pr].677 âPetrozavodskâ. There is no confirmation of this event in the later sources.
2006 g. on October 14 – according to the eyewitnesses [PL] âSaint Petersburgâ it is alien from Petersburg to Kronstadt and it is banal in it is Baltic for the road tests, but it could not reach it was Baltic it returned to the plant modification to Saint Petersburg (not confirmed).
2006 g. on October 23 – head [PL] of [pr].677 âSaint Petersburgâ is successfully past the first 10-day stage of road tests in Baltic region (26.10.2009 g. [PL] it returned under its own power into Saint Petersburg).
2006 g. on November 10 – on [FGUP] âadmiralty shipyardsâ is laid third [PL] of [pr].677 – B -587 âSevastopolâ (plant of â01572). Due to the state in 2005. it was intended to give to boat name âPetrozavodskâ – either error in media outlets or some confusion.
To be or not to be…is Sebastopol different to Petrozadovsk?
2007 g. on January 25 – on March 17 – the sequential stage of the plant road tests BY [PL] âSaint Petersburgâ in the Baltic region with the corrections and the modifications BREO and GED – main electrical engine. [PL] during the tests accompanied [SKR] âPilkiyâ. Finalizing the sliding devices of fairwater was one of the purposes of the tests. In the course of tests was perfected GED and its modification was required in particular in the part of software, other systems were tested. Ship is sent for routine repair and modification. Are passed 2808 miles. On the sums of tests was accepted the solution to conduct modifications and subsequent official tests [PL] in 2007.
2007 g. on September 5 – on September 30 – output [PL] âSaint Petersburgâ on the sequential (the second in 2007.) the stage of plant road tests. Tasks – testing GED – main electrical engine -, the measurements of noise characteristics [PL], finalizing navigation complex, the maneuverability underwater tests [PL]. In the completing stage it is carried out the measurement of physical pour on with the aid of the vessel of [fiz].[poley] [SFP] â[Subbotin]â.
2007 g. October – took place military technical council on which it was examined the possibility of output [PL] âSaint Petersburgâ to the State tests in 2007. and was discussed the state of works on OKR âLiraâ (unsatisfactory).
Is OKR = sonar suite?, russian acronym wasn’t “GAK”?
October 23 2007 – output submarine âSaint Petersburgâ on the sequential (the third in 2007.) the stage of plant road tests. Tasks – testing GED – this is main electrical engine – in the different regimes and at the depths (they passed successfully). Are successfully tested so devices PMU (what’s this?), backup propellers RDK-35, rdp, RLS (- this is nav radar preliminarily), BIUS and the blocks BDA of complex âbladeâ (don’t know what’s this). It was impossible to conduct all tests of navigation complex â[Apassionata]â (in connection with the malfunction of some elements of complex).
2007 November – was planned completing [epat] of plant road tests with the complete checking and delivering the main electric motor SED-1, sonar system L-01 and the navigation complex âApassionataâ. But in the 5th section on the control board of main electric motor happened fire (PL it stood in the wall âadmiralty shipyardsâ and in 2007. tests are not completed (on SED-1, OKR âLiraâ and OKR âKodakâ).
Question for Snake: is Appasionata ok now?, wasn’t used in 877EKM for Indian Navy?, it was offered on 636M for my navy, ROE guys said it was “last thing of technology”, I express my doubts to submarine officers who attended the meetings after knowing the indian problems with Club-S and supposed Appasionata problem related to it…what do you think?
2008 – planned in 2005. descent to the water [PL] âKronstadtâ (it did not take place). Information about [PL] âPetrozavodskâ from the media outlets disappears.
Where is Petrozadovsk :(?
19 January 2009 g – communication on the forum of Russian submariners – on submarine âSaint Petersburgâ sonar system does not work, mail electric engine works on 50% of power. The building of submarine of pr.677E is frozen, there are no customers. Building of PL âKronstadtâ and âSevastopolâ is so frozen.
Question for Snake65: What about Petrozadovsk?
2009 g. March – [zam].[nachalnika] of general staff the Navies Vice Admiral Oleg [Burtsev] stated that in all for the Navies is planned building a series of 8 [PL] of [pr].677.
Just 8 Pr 677 are planned for the fleet?, in all?
2010 March- May – is expected the inspection [PL] âSaint Petersburgâ the Navies for the field testing, which will begin in August – September 2010.
For Snanke65: Field testing = experimental explotation?
PitMore about MGK-600
The installation of the 1st, 2nd and 3rd levels sonar system âIrtysh-Amforaâ to head submarine probably was conducted on â[Sevmash]â since February 2005. until July 2006. During 2007 g. on â[Sevmash]â from the Taganrog plant âPriborâ are delivered for the installation on [PL] of [pr].885 the instruments 1E, 1M4, 1MK, 16G, three hydrophones and other equipment sonar system âIrtysh-Amphora-Yaâ. The adjustment of equipment sonar of the 4th and 5th levels was conducted probably into 2008-2009 [g].[g]. (agreement to the delivery THE sonar system of Taganrog plant âPriborâ from 16.08.2006 g.).
I hope Norman Friedman could take this new information for his new World Naval Weapons System, off course, in a better way đ
PitAnecoic coating is Molniya-M-DU and Molniya-M, similar to 677.
They don’t know if typical seven blade propellor or pump-jet like used on Alrosa.
Combat systems:
Combat Direction System (BIUS in russian) of the new type, which unites in the regime of real time control of all combat systems, information about the state of ship and information from the observation facilities and aim designation. The function of the BIUS is ensured by several BTsVM (high speed digital computer). BIUS of ship can obtain and transmit data to the other spacecraft by the protected sonar data-transmission system.
Sonar system MGK-600 âIrtysh-Anforaâ (âIrtysh-Amphora-Yaâ) of the new generation of development by TsNII (Central Scientific Research Institute) âMorfizpriborâ (concern âOkeanpriborâ, [Sankt]- Petersburg, R & D of 1980-1987 [g].[g]., productions of Taganrog plant âPriborâ) with by conformal large-dimension basic antenna âAmforaâ and digital processing of signals with the use of digital libraries of the system of the automatic classification of purposes âAjax-Mâ (OKR since 1985 ; chief designer [Yu].[S].[Perelmuter], TsNII â[Morfizpribor]â). Lateral conformal antennas of large area. Towed antenna in the fairing about the vertical tail assembly [PL]. Prototype sonar system underwent tests on test [PLA] K-403 âKazanâ of [pr].09780 âAkson -2â in 1998.
More following.
PitNoise reduction on Graney SSGN, babelfish junkey translation edited by me:
Submarine construction – [polutorakorpusnaya]. Durable hull is divided in 10 sections. Light hull in the bow section and superstructure after the fairwater. Durable hullg is made from high-strength low-magnetic steel, probably, with the yield point to 100 kG/sq. mm. (thickness to 48 mm, pressing FUJICAR). Assembling hull is carried out by unit type method with the use of metallic cable dampers instead of the traditional rubber-cord pneumatic. Equipment is mounted by zone blocks by blocks on the massive frames. The new method of the layout of blocks [EU] and accessory equipment, cooling systems and power supply made it possible to decrease the noisiness on 10-15 dB. Are used the vibration-absorbing laminar beams, stanchions, elements of conduits and air ducts, other constructions, reducing vibration noise on 10-30 dB. Equipment is mounted on the vibration-absorbing honeycomb bodies from the composite materials. Each structural block is covered with the sound-proofing panels. Hull of SSGN is covered with rubber anti-sonar coating. On the boat is used the system of the active extinction (SAGAS) of noise within the limit of discrete composing by frequency 50-500 Hz.
Graney uses active noise cancellation, but only on the 50-500 Hz frequency, it made sense, those are the frequencies of the lower tonals, those that propagates further…
You see they have used different rafting techniques. Without an acoustic presion reference value (do they use the old microbar or the current micropascal reference pressure for underwater sound?, Snake?) can’t compare it. They didn’t say anyway, at what frequency.
If I see something else, will post.
Sign In
