More pics from IMDS-2015 can be found here.
http://sdelanounas.ru/blogs/64805/
The new destroyer is one weird looking ship.
Zubr is huge.
what is so weird about it?
It might get toned down in its final from what we see now, but the mast most likely will retain its height which is not much different from what we see on pr.1144 or pr.1164. But unlike these two, the new model will not be having the penalty of radar units weighting in excess tons in weight.
23560E
The beam reported is 20m which I think is on the lower side. To me the beam is definitely over 20m and probably around 24m?
Clearly mad putting all that superstructure sail-area that high up in the design….any serious wind over the beam will make that an entertaining hull to crew!.
Project “Priboy”
– 14,000t displacement
– 165m length
– 25m beam
– max speed: 20 knots
– range: 6000 nautical miles (can remain 60 days at sea)
– airwing: 4-6 x helicopters (Ka-27, Ka-52K)
– 4 x landing craft pr.11770 Serna or 2 x pr.12061 Murena hovercraft
– can transport up to 60 vehicles
– Pantsir-M airdefence system
some more pics of Project “Lavina”
The hull is interesting, when all hear about a trimaran hull… something different shape comes to mind as such ships/boats are multihull in such a way that it have a main hull and two smaller outrigger. But this one is really awesome. Good job. The ship as a whole is beautiful. 😎
After wasting 6-8 years (incl negotiation phase) on Mistrals we now see a Russian project which could be the true successor to the pr.1174 landing platform with docking facility and pr.1123 helicopter carrier. Current projects should have been the one to start with in the first place . I have been strong supporter of pr.1174 and a modified version of it and it looks like the new project have traces of the 1174. Hope this moves forward and Russian Navy gets it in required numbers.
At the Army-2015 military expo near Moscow, the two projects have come in the open. The initial Project “Priboy” later on turned out to be Project “Lavina” with the actual project “Priboy” being a different model with lighter displacement.
Krylov State Research Centre/Krylov Central Scientific Research Institute
Project “Lavina”
Specification
– displacement: 24,000tons
– max speed: 22 knots
– airwing: 16 helicopters, 6 landing
– 50 armored vehicles
– 6 x Palma air-defence unit
$2 billion sounds like old figures. Like the C-17, it is a costly platform with a price tag of over $333million/unit. Past the initial period smileys, these platforms are going to eat into the IAF and Indian budget for sure with the spares and maintenance.
India is the only ‘3rd world’ country operating the C-17 and with the Indian Rupee having the lowest purchasing power among all the operators of C-17s. it would be interesting to see what percentage of IAF budget these costly aircraft’s will be having in 10-15 years from now.
Kuwait
1 Kuwaiti Dinar = 3.32 USDUK
1 British Pound = 1.57 USDEurope
1 Euro = 1.14 USDCanada
1 Canadian Dollar = 0.83 USDAustralia
1 Australian Dollar = 0.80 USDQatar
1 Qatari Rial = 0.27 USDIndia
1 Indian Rupee = 0.016 USD
Post-Nepal earthquake evacuation operation success, IAF to buy three more C-17 aircraft
> $460million per aircraft! …or 10-12 LCA Tejas… Some guys have really enjoyed filling their pockets during past years with US contracts starting with C-130Js. And why these additional aircrafts? If I’m not wrong IAF till now have never used more than three C-17 in any rescue operations and, no!, C-17 is not going to ferry any T-72/90 or Arjun on a regular basis. We are yet to see even a single MBT being airlifted on a trial basis till now.
Btw, C-17 is proving itself as a delicate aircraft that is too big to fail. After all its over $450million/aircraft and it would be too costly for IAF to have any of it damaged, or in worst case scenario, loose one. Even in mission after the induction of C-17, what we have seen is the ‘grounded and inoperable’ IL-76 being the ones to spearhead missions that is deemed risky and C-17s following later on after the area/landing strip have been proofed for flight operations by IL-76s.
During Operation Raahat, the big delicate ‘commercial’ aircraft of Indian Airforce was operating at a safe distance from Aden and flying out citizens from Djibouti after Air India’s ‘military’ aircraft’s like A-320 and B-777 plunged into the combat zones to rescue stranded people and flew them out to safety of Djibouti.
But regardless of IAF playing it safe with their costly transport aircraft, citing the Saudi instructions, C-17 was the most suitable aircraft (other than Air India flights) for bringing back citizens from the safety of Djibouti due to its dedicated seating arrangement which IL-76 lacks. And we will likely see C-17s being used more for such transportation (like in Nepal earthquake relief) so that the rescued people at least have something comfortable to sit on.
If this is the way of operating transport aircraft that is too costly to be risked in operations, IL-76 is going to stay on as long as C-17 is in IAF and beyond.
The front array part is small possibly due to space constraints of the Scorpene, so no wonder that the flank arrays comes as a standard listening feature as part of its sonar suite on the outer hull.
Compare it with that of pr.667 which have a conformal array inside the bow. But that mainly b’coz the 677 is a larger boat and is a ‘3 decker’ with space to spare. Unlike the Scorpene, 677 and 877/636 have their active array on their sail.
Sign In
