I don’t think it carries any other missiles.

Correct, she does have a couple of 40mm guns and a couple of AK 230 guns. Barak makes a good addition.

sigh if you want to believe what you want to believe sure go ahead no point in this discussion since its Off topic. But data suggests even tarantul can carry 8-12 yakhont there plenty of models and info to prove that.

“The universal missile weights only 3 tons, and it can be placed in all kinds of ships or launches of Russian or foreign make. Its guidance system can be used with various types of carriers. If installed on a ship being modernized, three containers with Yakhont missiles can replace a single launching position of an “old” cruise missile. For instance, when modernizing a boat of the 1241 Tarantul project, which was sold well to dozens of countries in the Soviet years, its four P-15 Termit missiles may be replaced with 12 Yakhont anti-ship cruise missiles.”

could be orginally they were have to just some metal beams holding those canisters guess specs changed?
Doesnt air launched version also have a small booster?

I’m sorry if you take it that way but, Jon, I was never arguing with you! So don’t give me that “off topic” stuff.

I know russian FACs can take Yakhont, I’ve seen images of the experimental Nanuchka ship modification, I’ve seen models of Tarantul with Brahmos. That was never the point. But just because it can be done on those shis doesn’t automatically mean it can be done the same way on Kashin class ships. So, I just have questions as to what rearming a ship that way does from the point of view of stability. That depends on a) the available space, b) the weight parked in that space as well as c) the location of that space (notably, how high up from the waterline). Is there a problem with having questions about something?

5_5: the french “Frégate anti-sous-marines” Tourville

huh? how can you disregard the booster dont get your argument here.

hmm as i said before you dont quite seem understand what i mean, material density plays a major role in bouyancy also in top weight issues. Also as i said how else can you explain the no of yakhont those vessels can carry as opposed to moskit.

It’s not an ARGUMENT! Not everything has to be ARGUMENT. Geeezzzzz!!!
I was just trying to make sense of the discrepancies in the data you and I brought to the table from our own sources.

No, I don’t quite understand what you mean. Perhaps you can enlighten me. I know what density is in materials so I can follow you in broad lines as regards equipment. But it remains that if Styx and Yakhont/Brahmos missile weight about the same and but you carry multiple Yakhont/Brahmos missiles in the space originally taken up by a single Styx, then that means a significant increase in weight carried in that space. Now, to me, that sounds like the same thing that you might be referring to as (increased) density.

By the way, just because 2 launch racks, each able to carry 6 Yakhont missiles, are installed on a Nanuchka for trial purposes does not necessarily mean that that (or any other) Nanuchka will actually be loaded up with 12 such missiles. I’ve seen images of that ship with the racks and carrying a single missile container in it but not any with both racks fully loaded up. Maybe you have, in which case I would be interested in an url to visit.

I was just playing arround with Maps Google today & found something pretty intresting.

But in Norfolk in the search bar, then
then scrawl 2 up & soom into the Naval Base & change to Sat view only.
You well find 2 carriers, some AB, some ticos, some Perrys, 1 LHA, 1 LHD, some subs,…

Who else has found some intresting stuff on Maps Google?

Amazing what you can actually see on these images:

Ships: 1 Knox FF, 3 Perry FFG, 8 AB DDG, 4 AB 2A DDG, 1 Spruance DDG, 5 Tico CG, 5 subs (ssn?), 2 LPD/LSD, 1 LHA, 1 LHD, 1 AOE, 2 AO, 1 LCM, 2 CVN.

Aircraft: 9 heli’s (2 on static display), 7 jet aircraft (2 on static display), 2 E2 Hawkeye AEW, 2 C2 Trader.

In 2003, the Navy started to remove the Mk-13 guided missile launchers from the remaining PERRY – class frigates. This action was designed to reduce the ships’ operating cost but leaves the PERRYs without the ability to fire guided missiles. The Navy explained the decision with the age of the Mk-13 system and the system’s ineffectivness against high-speed cruise missiles. The ships will receive an upgrade to the Phalanx system and a new missile decoy system to compensate the loss of their guided missile capabilities.

No more Mk13 launcher in the front

No more tracking and illuminating radar amidship, forward of the gun.

Depending on version, 1x Styx weighs between 2300 and 2600kg without booster and without launch container. By comparison, the 6.9-meter PJ-10 cruise missile weighs three tons. If it is similar to Yakhont/Oniks, it should weighs 3900 kg in its launch container. So, factoring in the wiehgts of booster and launch container, 1x Styx is about the same weight as 1x Brahmos. Which mean that if you replace 1x Styx with 2x Brahmos, you are doubling the weight. Replace 2x 2-Pack Styx on a Nanuchka with a 2x 6-pack of Brahmos, and you are tripling the weight. While that may work on a Nanuchka hull, it need not work on a Kashin hull (different hulls > different weight distributions and margins). Also, apart from weight issue, I dont think there is room enough to fit a 6-pack brahmos fit in the space available for a single Styx on the Rajput class. I think they would get up to 8 (4×2) brahmos instead of the current 4×1 Styx. It could also be that they will get 4 Brahmos and retain 2 Styx. Is it known whether Rajput has just 2 Brahmos installed (i.e. port side only) or does it have 4 installed (a pair on both port and starboard)?

not possible because SM-2 requires Mid course guidance along with time sharing of illuminators both of which would require software and platforms to support it. Also i believe it require a 3D radar for target location to be preprogrammed into missile before launch.

I’m getting the feeling were talking past each other. I’m referring to a situation in which you have a VLS equipped Spruance and, say, a Ticonderoga or Arleigh Burke nearby. The Spruance launches an SM2 but the missile is controlled/guided/directed by the nearby AEGIS equipped ship. In this case – a cooperative engagement- the Spruance wouldn’t need a 3D radar or illuminators. After all, these are on the Tico/AB. Both ships would need CEC (i.e. some software and communications equipment) and the Spruance would need to be able to at least put the missile in a certain box where upon the other ship can take over the guidance proces. Or is my understanding of CEC incorrect?