dark light

Wanshan

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1,321 through 1,335 (of 3,544 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Navies news from around the world -III #2002865
    Wanshan
    Participant

    i was more referencing to the “optional dual feeding device” which is mentioned in the 76 mm sr pdf.
    http://www.otomelara.it/EN/Common/files/OtoMelara/pdf/business/naval/mediumCalibers/76-62SR.pdf

    the quote from navweaps sounds more like manual loading than full auto dual feeding.

    They offer that for the C mount too, not just SR
    http://www.otomelara.it/EN/Common/files/OtoMelara/pdf/business/naval/mediumCalibers/76-62C.pdf

    Wonder how that would work, a double feed. Considering the current single feed situation:

    http://digilander.libero.it/en_mezzi_militari/html/cannoni/76sr_dett.jpg

    Wouldn’t it require a second – off mount – magazine?

    Made me wonder about the Otomatic/AMRAD too:

    The two-man power-operated turret is fitted with a 76 mm gun that can fire a variety of ammunition types including a special APFSDS round.

    That would need to be able to rapidly switch from AAA to AT rounds.

    in reply to: Navies news from around the world -III #2002916
    Wanshan
    Participant

    does anybody know, if they will use dual ammunition feeding for the new strales mounts?

    To achieve the higher rates of fire for the SR, OTO-Melara modified the ordnance itself as well as the ammunition feed and fuzing. As a result, existing Compact mountings cannot be converted to the SR standard, but a retrofit kit is available that does increase the ROF for the older weapon. The magazine for the SR is independent of the turret, which means that the feed can be interrupted to insert different kinds of ammunition, making the gun more flexible against multiple targets.

    The Compact uses a single main feed drum which holds 70 rounds. This feeds a central screw hoist which holds six rounds. The hoist leads up to a loading station below the left trunnion. Two arms alternate picking up rounds and placing them into a breech loading drum that holds four rounds. The drum feeds rounds onto a loading tray which also receives the spent cartridge.

    http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_3-62_mk75.htm

    in reply to: Navies news from around the world -III #2002922
    Wanshan
    Participant

    Russia’s Black Sea Fleet may lose all warships by 2015

    http://en.rian.ru/images/15841/71/158417172.jpg

    The majority of warships in the Russian Black Sea Fleet have been in service for over 30 years and would not be fit for sea missions by 2015, a Russian newspaper said.

    “The crews will certainly try to keep their ships in decent condition until the last moment, but the “iron” has its service life. Nobody would dare to set sail on a ship whose bottom has rotten away,” the Gazeta newspaper said on Friday citing a Navy source.
    Full Story

    Interesting little article, for example:

    The official said the only solution for the looming crisis would be the construction of at least a dozen of Project 20380 corvettes which have been designed to protect Russia’s coastal waters and oil and gas sea transportation routes, especially in the Baltic Sea and the Black Sea.

    First a doom scenario, then the solution being lobbied for 😉

    The source said that the Russian shipbuilding industry simply does not have the capacity to build the sufficient number of warships and submarines to satisfy the needs of the fleet.

    So, we can expect more orders being placed abroad? The Mistral story may only be the tip of the iceberg.

    “All shipbuilding yards are swamped with foreign orders years ahead, and it is difficult to raise the production capacity even with sufficient financing because they do not have enough skilled workers,” the source said.

    Swamped with foreign orders?! Like, Gorshkov and a few Talwar IIs for India, a couple of corvettes for Vietnam? (Am I missing any orders?)

    He expressed hope that Russia would be able to order some warships to be built at Ukrainian shipyards now that Moscow and Kiev have set step on the way to improve relations that soured during the presidency of Viktor Yushchenko

    Interesting scenario. Though I wonder if the Ukranian naval yards are in any better position or condition than the Russian yards are: it’s not that they’ve been churning out navy ships in recent years. What other parties might Russia consider should it decide to order abroad?

    in reply to: The Groshkov Saga- The Final stretch. #2003002
    Wanshan
    Participant

    I wasn’t suggesting using Russian steam plant for the re-engineing of Vikramaditya. Access to other suppliers since the fall of the USSR has opened up the choices available…

    You mean “put in an entirely different power plant” rather that “a complete rebuild of the existing power plant”. Of course, that would be quite an operation, trying to find or put together a 200k HP powerplant and fitting it into the existing hull.

    The main power plant ([GEU]) of cruiser was standardized with adapted previously [EU] of the cruisers of projects 58 and 1123. In “Kiev” it was accepted four-shaft, boiler and turbine (eight boilers [KVN] 98/64), with the high parameters of vapor, by the total power of 180 000 hp [GEU] consisted of four autonomous [turbokotelnykh] groups, located on two in two machine- boiler departments, which form two independent sections and workers each on its screw propeller. Four main turbine gear aggregates of the type OF TV -12-3 made possible for ship to develop the speed of complete running of 30,7 units.

    Four bronze four-blade low-noise screw propellers were used as the propellers. Ship power stations (six turbogenerators even four diesel generators with the total power of 15 000 kW) were arranged in the adjacent with the machine- boiler departments energys-section, at a rate of two to each echelon. The elements of installation, generating units and main switchboards were standardized with project 1123. For the automated management of electric power installation served the system “Terek -2”. Widely adapted the amortization of mechanisms and the use of the insulating coatings, especially in the machine rooms.

    http://wunderwaffe.narod.ru/Magazine/MK/2003_07/

    in reply to: The Groshkov Saga- The Final stretch. #2003097
    Wanshan
    Participant

    So in theory, with an initial service life of 1987 to 1994, she could be regarded as a ‘low mileage’ ship, but the way she was treated when laid up is an important factor too. From the photographic evidence it would appear she recieved no maintenance at all whilst awaiting a buyer, beyond occassional checks that she wasn’t leaking! For the money that has been (eventually) agreed for her reconstruction, I would have opted for a whole new ship, or at the very least a complete re engineing rather than overhauling the existing somewhat unreliable powerplant. Of course hindsight is a wonderful thing…

    NOT SO SURE REENGINEER WOULD MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE GIVEN THE HISORY OF THAT PLANT…

    Moskva-class

    Moskva: suffered extreme machinery problems and her plant was rebuilt twice. Suffered severe fire 2 February 1975 Stationary at Sevastopol after 1983, except for one short cruise late in 1991. Remained nominally in service, but inoperable, as an accommodations hulk until stricken 7 November 1996. Scrapped in India
    Leninggrad: stricken due to poor condition 24 June 1991 but hulk remained at Sevastopol through 1995. Scrapped in Greece

    Kiev-class

    Kiev-clas machinery was a doubled version of the Moskva machinery, and equally deficient. Experience showed these ships to be highly flamable; all suffered at least one significant fire.

    Kiev: Overhauled at Nikolayev 1985. Stricken due to poor condition 30 June 1993 but retained as parts source for Gorshkov. Sold and scrapped in India
    Minsk: Overhauled 1981-82 at Vladivostock. Inoperable after 1989, laid up in reserve 2/1992, stricken 30 June 1993. Towed to Shenzhen, China 8/1998 for use as a casino/entertainment complex.
    Novorossiysk: Laid up in reserve 9/92, stricken 30 June 1993. Scrapped at Pohang, South Korea 1997.
    Baku/Gorshkov: Renamed Gorshkov 4 Oct 1990. Lasted only 5 years before being rendered inoperable by machinery problems. Inoperable after major machinery casualty 1992, major fire in 1993. Boiler explosion and fire 2 February 1994, under repair until mid-1995; went to sea briefly 5/1995. Remained nominally in service but never deployed again. Given to India, on condition that she would be refurished in Russia. To enter IN service as INS Vikramaditya

    Kuznetsov class

    Generally based on the Kiev hull but with significant enlargement and improvements. The ships use the Kiev machinery and the only operational ship has suffered machinery problems.

    in reply to: Russian Navy News & Discussion, Part III #2003194
    Wanshan
    Participant

    Neustrashimy and Jaroslav also have such combo and it’s supposed to be ok. Kulakov also has the AK-630 and Gibka, anyway.
    Kulakov never had Kinzhal installed before, so answer to your last question is simple – nothing, it simply was never there:D

    My image of the Udaloy class has lost a bit of shine today 🙁

    in reply to: Guess the Ship, it's back #2003214
    Wanshan
    Participant

    Ocean’s davits were occupied with her own LCVPs so I didn’t think to mention that possibility.

    But your excellent detective work has given us the answer, it was a Condock after all!

    Given the UKNL Landing force, I’m wondering if the LCVPs of NL and UK marines routinely ‘cross-deck’ (or rather: ‘cross-dock’) between NL and UK navy ships…?

    in reply to: Russian Navy News & Discussion, Part III #2003217
    Wanshan
    Participant

    No, only the aft Kinzhal is instalated, so it’s 4×8.

    Well, even for 32 missiles, it would be nice to have 2 fire directing stations: a) for the sake of all round coverage and b) for the sake of coverage against multiple targets from multiple directions.

    Anyway, what happened when to the bow 4×8 and why?

    in reply to: Russian Navy News & Discussion, Part III #2003314
    Wanshan
    Participant

    It’s not a rumour. The missile is 40km version. Pozitiv-M2 radar instead of Furke.

    How many missiles in those 12 cells? 12? or are they multi-packed?

    in reply to: Russian Navy News & Discussion, Part III #2003318
    Wanshan
    Participant

    Gibka is installed on the vacant platform for forward FCS for Kinzhal. Top-most version.

    Huh? So there then only remains a single Cross Sword / Podkat MR-360 on the Udaloy, for FC of 8×8 Khinzal? That’s insane?!

    😮

    in reply to: Navies news from around the world -III #2003323
    Wanshan
    Participant

    Is the new ship Soobrazitelny will have a new AK 630-M2 instead of older AK-630.?

    Why would one think it is getting them? Is there any information pointing in that direction?

    in reply to: Guess the Ship, it's back #2003329
    Wanshan
    Participant

    Definitely weren’t carried by a British naval unit, no LPDs were available for Cold Response 06 (there was a big issue made of COMATG’s HQ being ashore) and the Bays weren’t in service at that time. The amphibious shipping present during the exercise was entirely British (Ocean + LSLs) except for the NL-LCVPs and whatever Norwegian boats were around. If Rotterdam had brought them, she didn’t participate in any of the exercise. There was some mention at the time of Condocks http://www.condock.de/fleet.php but I don’t think that was in direct relation to the LCVPs.

    – The only LPD that the Dutch had at that time was Rotterdam as Johan de Witt wasn’t commissioned yet in 2006.
    – HMS Ocean can carry LCVPs on davids.

    In navolging van deelname aan Battle Griffin 2005, was SFMarns wederom ingeschreven voor een grote Nato-oefening in Noorwegen. Deelname aan Cold Response 2006 (CR06) bestond uit de Netherlands Special Operations Task Group (NL SOTG), die in het kader van Nato Response Force 6 (NRF-6) tot 1 juli 2006 gereed staat op vijf dagen notice-to-move. De NL SOTG bestaat uit twee C-teams en een ML-team van de 2e SF-cie (Laverkcie) en een stafelement, bestaande uit personeel van het Amfibisch Verkenningspeloton (Afmverkpel) en SFMarns, aangevuld met een aantal specialisten vanuit het Marine Training Command (MTC). Behalve NL SOTG deden Hr.Ms. Van Amstel, Hr.Ms.Willemstad en de Eerste Bootcompagnie van het Amfibisch Ondersteuningsbataljon (1- Btcie/Amfostbat) mee aan CR06.

    =

    In imitation of participation to Battle Griffin 2005, SFMarns had been again registered for large Nato-oefening in Norway. Participation to Cold Response 2006 (CR06) existed from the Netherlands Special Operations ask Group (Netherlands SOTG), which within the framework of NATO Response Force 6 (NRF-6) states on five days notice-to-move, ready up to 1 July 2006. THE Netherlands SOTG exist from two c teams and ML-team of 2e SF-cie (Laverkcie) and the staff element, existing from staff of the amphibious exploration group (Afmverkpel) and SFMarns, with a number of specialists from Navy training completed Command (MTC). Except Netherlands SOTG Hr.Ms did. Van Amstel, Hr.Ms.Wi llemstad and the first boat company of the amphibious support battalion (1 – Btcie/Amfostbat) to CR06.

    Dutch ship contingent in CR06: Van Amstel, Willemstad and 1 boat company.
    No LPD.

    De 1ste Bootgroep van het Amfostbat is, in het kader van de samenwerking met 539 Assault Squadron Royal Marines (ASRM), volgens het UKNL/LF concept ontplooid voor een Winterdeployment te Noorwegen.Wegens de talloze verplichtingen die het bataljon heeft, is er gekozen voor een configuratie van 3 x LCVP Mk3 met een kleine staf, ondersteund door technisch en logistiek personeel.

    De vaar- en voertuigen werden 26 januari aan boord van Condock 5 geladen. De rest van de eenheid vloog op maandag 30 januari met transport van de Koninklijke Luchtmacht (KLu) naar Evenes. Na het ontladen, omvaren en installeren op Hellar Bogen kon de skitraining aanvangen.

    =

    1st the boat group of the Amfostbat is, within the framework of the cooperation with 539 Assault Squadron Royal Navy (ASRM), according to the UKNL/LF concept developed for Winterdeployment at Because of the innumerable obligations which the battalion has, has been chosen for a configuration of 3 x LCVP Mk3 supported with a small staff, by technically and logistical staff.

    The sailing and vehicles became 26 January to border of Condock 5 charged. The rest of the entity flew on Monday 30 January with transport of the royal air power (KLu) to Evenes. After, the omvaren unloaded and install on Hellar arcs could the ski training start.

    http://www.defensie.nl/_system/handlers/generaldownloadHandler.ashx?filename=/media/QPO-01-2006_tcm46-126364.pdf

    Indeed, Condock was used (NL MoD source)

    in reply to: Guess the Ship, it's back #2003390
    Wanshan
    Participant

    I got it first 🙂

    That makes you DA MAN! 😀

    in reply to: Guess the Ship, it's back #2003441
    Wanshan
    Participant

    #1 is a Ramped Craft Logistic (RCL) of the Royal Logistics Corps (RLC). An RLC RCL. The Norwegian flag was well spotted, but a red herring. I think they had it up as some sort of courtesy thing while we were on exercise in Norway, the RLC ensign was flying from the ensign staff right aft.

    #2 Dutch LCVP – if Wanshan says it’s a MkIII, it’s a MkIII. Also in Norway. Not sure if these guys self-deployed or if they were carried up there, but they were operating without a Dutch mothership.

    #3 was an entrant in the 2008 Fowey Regatta raft race, closely based on the naval vessel present at the regatta. I was hoping someone might try to ID what it was based on.

    #4 Ja Worsley has said everything short of the actual type name. Bonus points for the ship it’s being carried in.

    RCL: Told you it looked army …. 😉

    The Ramped Craft Logistic (RCL) is a type of landing craft operated by the Royal Logistic Corps of the British Army.
    There are currently RCLs stationed at the military port at Marchwood, near Southampton, and at the British base at Akrotiri, Cyprus.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramped_Craft_Logistic

    The Ramped Landing Craft Logistic (RCL) is used for amphibious operations and is designed to deliver men and material onto beaches. The craft are crewed by the Royal Logistics Corps (RLC). Two RCLs – Andalsnes and Akyab – are based in Cyprus.

    http://www.army.mod.uk/equipment/boats/1540.aspx

    Dutch LVCP Mk 3: RNthN owns 6, usually carried by RNN LPDs over long distances. I suspect HNLMS Rotterdam (or possibly even a British ship e.g. Albion) carried them to Norway but that they operate independently while in Norway.

    The pic with the boat on trailer: is it a Pacific 22/28 Rigid Inflatable (RIBs)?

    in reply to: Russian Navy News & Discussion, Part III #2003444
    Wanshan
    Participant

    If installed, I would expect to see Ghibka both port and starboard on the bridge roof, just about over the 2nd bridge side-window (from the front).

Viewing 15 posts - 1,321 through 1,335 (of 3,544 total)