kirov class battle cruiser

[kato]

I did notice interestingly that the hanger deck was reached from the flight deck via a lift, didn't the US try that arrangement and had lots of issues?

France and Italy used that arrangement since the 60s without many problems (among others on the Jeanne d'Arc and Vittorio Veneto helicopter cruisers).

The 8,800-ton Vittorio Veneto, especially post-modernization, in fact shows some more similarity in the heavy, layered air defense system (with SM1-ER long-range SAMs and eight 76mm guns and three 40mm CIWS as close-in defense).

 

[carman1877]

the Kirov Class carries enough sams to take out a small airforce.

I personally think that it is one of the, if not the best modern surface combatant.

It can beat most modern cruisers in one thing, that it can go anywhere without refueling.(nuclear)

People say it stinks cause the russsians dont have funding but the whole idea made the americans recommission the Iowa Class Battleship, so.

does it only carry 20 ship wreck missiles? no reloads?

 

[kato]

No ships carry reloads for anti-ship missiles themselves. And 20 long-range anti-ship missiles is more than any other ship on the planet carries, to my knowledge.

The only ships that are variable about that are ships equipped with a US Mk13 launcher, went out of vogue in favour of VLS.

 

[tphuang]

the Kirov Class carries enough sams to take out a small airforce.

I personally think that it is one of the, if not the best modern surface combatant.

It can beat most modern cruisers in one thing, that it can go anywhere without refueling.(nuclear)

People say it stinks cause the russsians dont have funding but the whole idea made the americans recommission the Iowa Class Battleship, so.

does it only carry 20 ship wreck missiles? no reloads?

the SAMs on Kirov also have anti-shipping modes, so it could do a lot of damage. As for taking on a small air force, that's probably not going to happen. The problem with Kirov is that it's a huge target and does not really have the latest sensors nor any kind of CeC.

 

[StevoJH]

France and Italy used that arrangement since the 60s without many problems (among others on the Jeanne d'Arc and Vittorio Veneto helicopter cruisers).

The 8,800-ton Vittorio Veneto, especially post-modernization, in fact shows some more similarity in the heavy, layered air defense system (with SM1-ER long-range SAMs and eight 76mm guns and three 40mm CIWS as close-in defense).

I believe it was a comment on another forum (warships1 maybe) where they were going on about leaks in the hanger lifts of the Virginia class cruisers, and how on one of the ships they had a pool table in the hanger after the tomahawk refit, but it kept filling up with water or something.

The newest of the Kirov's is fitted with the S-400 SAM, apparently the South Koreans are developing a modified version of it, so it must not be bad considering they probably have access to Patriot.

 

[Firehorse]

And 20 long-range anti-ship missiles is more than any other ship on the planet carries, to my knowledge.

OSCAR II (ANTYEY) (TYPE 949A) (SSGN) can carry 24 SS-N-19 Shipwreck (Granit) SSMs! http://www.janes.com/defence/naval_forces/news/jfs/jfs000814_2_n.shtml

http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/oscar/

I propose that this tread is merged with the older "New Kirov" tread!

IMO, these ships may one day team up with nuclear icebreakers to patrol/enforce Russian claims in the Arctic.

 

[kato]

well, make it surface ship then... and let's not count TASM ;-)

 

[StevoJH]

well, make it surface ship then... and let's not count TASM ;-)

TASM doesnt count, didn't they scrap them all?

The Kirov's doing EEZ patrol? overkill in the most extreme way, thats what corvettes, patrol frigates and OPV's are for.

 

[Feanor]

the SAMs on Kirov also have anti-shipping modes, so it could do a lot of damage. As for taking on a small air force, that's probably not going to happen. The problem with Kirov is that it's a huge target and does not really have the latest sensors nor any kind of CeC.

So with a proper modernization program, or perhaps even a revisiting the idea of nuclear battleships, we could have a modern variant of it that provides a viable capital-class ship in the modern naval context? Because it seems that naval action has become secondary in the modern day and age, as the main purpose of the navy now is force projection and support of a landing. A modern Kirov-style design would not only be a centerpiece for a blue-water navy, but also unique in terms of the organic C3 and heavy weapons that it would bring to bear.

 

[kato]

When you're at it, also rip out the (for that kind of role useless) Granit and install some 30-40 Iskander-M launchers instead...

 

[carman1877]

can some help me understand how the kirov class anti submarine system works

 

[Feanor]

When you're at it, also rip out the (for that kind of role useless) Granit and install some 30-40 Iskander-M launchers instead...

Why not? A navalized version of the Iskander-M, or even a whole new cruise missile system for it. I think that would make a lot more sense for Russia then a carrier program calling for 6 carriers.

 

[Firehorse]

The Kirov's doing EEZ patrol? overkill in the most extreme way, thats what corvettes, patrol frigates and OPV's are for.

The Arctic is big, and those corvettes, Offshore Patrol Vessels (OPVs) & patrol frigates will need frequent refueling and they are not made for heavy and/or ice covered seas. Even without the ice, the ocean there will be stormy.
Take a good look at this map- the new Russian claim isn't in the 200mi zone-
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/44069000/gif/_44069525_arctic_russia416.gif

 

[swerve]

Take a look at some of the OPVs, patrol frigates & the like out there. E.g. the Danish Thetis class - 8300 nautical miles range, 60 days endurance without resupply, ice-strengthened. They patrol Arctic waters & the North Atlantic, in all weathers, all year round: heavy and ice-covered seas are exactly what they're built for.

 

[Grand Danois]

Take a look at some of the OPVs, patrol frigates & the like out there. E.g. the Danish Thetis class - 8300 nautical miles range, 60 days endurance without resupply, ice-strengthened. They patrol Arctic waters & the North Atlantic, in all weathers, all year round: heavy and ice-covered seas are exactly what they're built for.

Actually Denmark now also have corvette sized OPV. The first of class went above 81 ddg Northern Lat recently.

http://forsvaret.dk/SOK/Nyt+og+Pres...sfartøjet+KNUD+RASMUSSEN+nået+op+på+8151N.htm

Btw, I really like the idea of Iskanders on a heavy cruiser. Better concept than the AGS for the DD(X)/1000.

 

[ASFC]

The Arctic is big, and those corvettes, Offshore Patrol Vessels (OPVs) & patrol frigates will need frequent refueling and they are not made for heavy and/or ice covered seas. Even without the ice, the ocean there will be stormy.
Take a good look at this map- the new Russian claim isn't in the 200mi zone-
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/44069000/gif/_44069525_arctic_russia416.gif

I agree with Swerve on this one-build ships that are designed for the job, not bring in a 'Battlekroozer' whos weapons would probably all freeze up before you got a chance to use them.

And the ice might be melting, but those seas will be freezing and thawing for years to come-so you won't want to chance a ship that (correct me if i'm wrong) doesn't have as much ice strengtening as a say a purpose built Ice breaker or Ice patrol ship (like the Thetis or Endurance or even Russias own Icebreakers for example) getting trapped and not being able to get out until it thaws again. There is good reason why the likes of Canada are building Ice strengthed patrol ships fo use up there in the Artic and not more Surface Combatants.

 

[carman1877]

the russians have 2 kirovs left in service. one provides protection for the Pacific fleet and the other the Northern Fleet. these ships are used for patrol because they are flagships and lead the pack. if they had a war(other than georgian) thaese should would be on the front line.

 

[tphuang]

Actually Denmark now also have corvette sized OPV. The first of class went above 81 ddg Northern Lat recently.

http://forsvaret.dk/SOK/Nyt+og+Pres...sfartøjet+KNUD+RASMUSSEN+nået+op+på+8151N.htm

Btw, I really like the idea of Iskanders on a heavy cruiser. Better concept than the AGS for the DD(X)/1000.

i think it would take up too much space. That's why you see so many ships go with the 155 mm now.

 

[Feanor]

Essentially it's a revisiting of the battleship concept in a more modern form. A large ship with powerful sensors, that acts as a C3 node for a fleet, and carries the heaviest/most long range weaponry, giving it superior engagement range.

 

[ASFC]

the russians have 2 kirovs left in service. one provides protection for the Pacific fleet and the other the Northern Fleet. these ships are used for patrol because they are flagships and lead the pack. if they had a war(other than georgian) thaese should would be on the front line.

And who is Russia going to have a convential war in the Arctic with? NATO? Unlikely IMO. All these patrol ships are being built so people can beef up their presence in the Arctic, to help their claims at the UN. Russias Icebreakers will do more to help their claims in the Arctic than any aging Kirov can.

The Russian Navy is at a crossroads-do they build a 'modern battleship' to replace the Kirovs or do they go down the CV route? It will be interesting to see if the Russian Navy continues with Nuclear propulsion if and when they replace the Kirovs given as well.