dark light

snake65

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 451 through 465 (of 746 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Project 1153 picture question/general wondering #2055599
    snake65
    Participant

    Well I was talking about actual physical system fits.
    Anyway the drawing process of 1153 may take awhile, its one huge ship and with the vague detail information its equally frustrating as it is demanding. But Golly wont give up that easy, I will complete it, even if its one line per day but it shall be done!!;)

    You are a true artist!:diablo:

    in reply to: Project 1153 picture question/general wondering #2055660
    snake65
    Participant

    You are wrong regarding 1144 Golly. The original project called for Kinzhal, Kortik and AK-130. As none were going to be ready on schedule, on the first ship they all were replaced with Osa, AK-630 and AK-100. On Frunze AK-130 was already installed, but still Osa and AK-630, on Kalinin AK-130 and Kortik were present but no Kinzhal still, and finally Peter with full weapon suit, but still only one Kinzhal set. I guess, if 1153 would have been built, they would have performed very similar change.

    in reply to: Project 1153 picture question/general wondering #2055671
    snake65
    Participant

    Yes, technically it should be possible. The available internal space in the superstructure will be somewhat less though, may be that’s the reason the design was changed. If You’ve seen the picture of Mars-Passat mockup, there’s hell-of-alot equipment inside.
    BTW, Kortik was planned for 1144 as well, which entered service in 1980 with Kinzhal replaced by Osa and Kortik by AK-630.

    in reply to: Project 1153 picture question/general wondering #2055700
    snake65
    Participant

    No, Golly, unfortunately this is one of the “pocket” museums of design bureaus and it’s possible to get there only if you have very good contacts at that design bureau.
    As for Kortik and Kinzhal, they both were designed during the same time period – started in the end of 70’s (around 78, IIRC), ship trials started in 1982 for Kinzhal and in 1983 for Kortik, both accepted by Navy in 1989. So, Kortik was intended for both 1153 and 1143.3 and.4. Also keep in mind that Kortik production rates were much lower than Kinzhal, because they were initially manufactured by KBP itself. That’s why it seems that they are later design.

    in reply to: Project 1153 picture question/general wondering #2055743
    snake65
    Participant

    There are no easy answers, Golly. Until there will be lucky guy with digital camera in Nevsky PKB museum, we will have no better photos.
    As to the weapon suite, take notice that 1143.4 (Gorshkov) was layed down in 1978 instead of cancelled first 1153. Effectively this means that at least the later version of 1153 was meant to have Kinzhal and Kortik or to put it short – weapon suite of 1143.4. As for the the initial version of 1153, you said already, that Novorossiysk was designed with Kinzhal and Kortik as well, meaning that 1153 (started in 1973) was most probably from the beginning designed for the same armement. You can rule out Uragan though, as it’s area defence SAM (Russian term is SAM for collective defence) and therefore was not going to be installed on aircraft cruisers, because their collective defence function was performed by airwing.
    Hope this helps.;)

    in reply to: 054A and the OHP: a comparison #2057641
    snake65
    Participant
    in reply to: 054A and the OHP: a comparison #2057656
    snake65
    Participant

    There’s no reason to doubt that China has had suffcient access to this kind of equipment. 😉

    in reply to: Russian Navy : News & Discussion #2062319
    snake65
    Participant

    I don’t see where there would be SLBMs in front of the sail. There are no visible doors, and the missile section behind the sail is far wider than the raised section in front of the sail.

    The “unfinished” look to the hull may be due to the fact that the boat is only supposed to be like 80% (reported previously, right?) complete. Either way the hull exterior is not nearly as smooth as one would expect from a stealthy SSBN.

    84%, reported readiness at launch, or rather roll-out. The surface of her outer hull will be the same as on St.Peterburg,when finished. I’m much more disappointed that they were not able to put 12m long Bulavas in 13.5m hull smoothly. At least, it’s 16 missiles, not 12. Perhaps Nevsky will have a smaller hump:cool:

    in reply to: Russian Navy : News & Discussion #2062354
    snake65
    Participant

    They have to make for Victors being phased out. Also only roughly half of 945 and 971 are operational.

    in reply to: Russian Navy : News & Discussion #2062380
    snake65
    Participant

    RSM55 , Can you confirm if the Russians are still going ahead with the Yasen class (Severdovinisk ) SSN and would be building that in Numbers or Will the discontinue with the Yasen class and go with a new 5000 tons class smaller SSN design as was stated some time back

    Allegedly the money is alotted for the first Yasen and construction is going on, the second is still just a number of separate sections, not welded together. If the money flow will not stop for some reason or other, we’ll soon see rollout of Severodvinsk and a second one by 2009-2010. But that will be the last of them.

    in reply to: Russian Navy : News & Discussion #2063051
    snake65
    Participant

    It could be polymer based, but most of it can be “blown in” (keyword here is project 01710 aka Makrel aka SS-553 – a nice side effect of tests which were initially focused on speed/power ratio increase). And some carbon-carbon would do the job as well (not externally though). From the pics I would opt for a polymer-based thin outer surface with sandwiched pseudo-carbon and internal injection grids.

    The open part of test results of 01710 were in one of Typhoon mags, will have to refresh on the subject, but of course, it’s a possibility and may be one of the reasons for long build of 885 and 955 (besides lack of money).

    in reply to: Russian Navy : News & Discussion #2063055
    snake65
    Participant

    Besides, I am extremely happy that no one thought to ask what boat is moored next to the Kazan on the now famous pic…Or even worse, what is the ancient-looking thingy on her right… Very happy.

    A 1910, I’d say. What’s so extremely secretive there if nobody cared that it can be filmed? Regarding the other boat, very little can be seen. Apparently this has caused a problem even at VIF2 NE to identify it.

    in reply to: Russian Navy : News & Discussion #2063173
    snake65
    Participant

    [QUOTE=RSM55;1106392]
    I’m sorry, but I’ve got the nagging feeling that the specs the Russians have given are bogus – but not the displacement. That’s why: the real dimensions of the boat are likely to remain classified for quite a time, and the given dimensions (170m-13,5-9) just don’t fit the announced displacement (14700/24000). The displacement is likely to be true as they had to prepare the dockside of the shipyard for it, and as the shipyard is half civilian it has transpired from different sources that it’s actually quite bigger than the 667. It actually must be bigger, as the missile containers are fully integrated (no “hunchback”) and, most of all, the Irtysh-Amphora is… quite big (not to say enormous). Take a look at the bow of the “Kazan” testbed (Akson-2), it’s just…monstrous.

    And yes, some rumours circulate about the YD having 16 launchers after all…

    [QUOTE]

    667BDRM: 167.4×11.7×8.8, D=11740-18200
    955(as announced): 170×13.5×9, D=14700-24000
    What’s so F… heavy in there? I’d say displacement should be 21000 at the most.
    Kazan bow is 16m in diameter, if they try to fit that in YD, it should be called Tadpole-II. To say nothing about Yasen which is supposed to be slimer than Borei. So I guess a smaller or scaled down version of Irtish-Amfora is going in there.

    in reply to: Russian Navy : News & Discussion #2063263
    snake65
    Participant

    955 is essentially of the same dimensions as a 667BDRM, meaning it’s 18 kT, not a 24KT boat.
    Sferrin, you know quite well what’s the difference between single and double hull boats and where the larger displacement goes, no need to exercise in witty comments. No doubt that in a single hull boat of that displacement even measly Sovs can put 24 Bulavas instead of 16

    in reply to: Russian Navy : News & Discussion #2063363
    snake65
    Participant

    Could it be possible that some kind of Composite metal would have been used , Like Tiles sandwitched between two layers of Steel , Or some multilayer material used which uses combination of Metal and special material which help in reducing/absorbing sound.

    Also can some one confirm if Borei is a Double Hull or Single Hull sub, Besides what type and generation of reactor it uses a 4th Gen PWR or some Liquid metal reactor ?

    Double hull, PWR

Viewing 15 posts - 451 through 465 (of 746 total)