Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

I know about Klub but I am talking about the big long range ones with 533 mm Torpedoes , Klub carries a small torpedo APR-3 series which are smaller 350 mm torpedoes.

http://eng.ktrv.ru/production_eng/323/512/521/

http://militaryforces.ru/weapon-2-35-212.html

GarryB wrote:AFAIK only Medvedka and Klub and both use the smaller torpedo... which BTW is sufficient for any western submarine.

My point related to 533 mm Torpedo for SS-N-16 like weapon was not related to its warhead size which is sufficient which i agree but compared to 350 mm weapon a 533 mm weapon would have bigger sensors and can have better processing capability to sniff out silent submarine plus it would afford longer range and higher speed compared to smaller weapon.

Some interesting Torpedo development that can be worth considering are the Black Shark and F21 both are 522 mm weapon

Check it out

Black Shark http://www.wass.it/WASSWEB/brochure/black_shark.pdf
F21 http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_generic.jsp?channel=dti&id=news/dti/2011/02/01/DT_02_01_2011_p20-283026.xml

Garry from what we could see in Club class weapon , the rocket torpedo has been standardised with 533 mm Rocket Torpedo carrying 350 mm Torpedo , which is good.

Boris Obsonov ,General Director of Tactical Missile Corporation, announce at Гидроавиасалоне-2012 that plans to increase both range and speed of the already outstanding underwater missile-torpedo "Squall" are actually in work in response to ever increasing interest ,by part of potential international buyers, toward this advanced weapon.


http://vz.ru/news/2012/9/7/597040.html


Other interesting points touched are the finished works for the export version of both the greatly improved models of air-lauched high speed anti-ship missile- Kh-31-AD- and antiradar missile Kh-31PD



The last word , obviously to the development of Hypersonic Missiles defined by Boris Obsonov (....in the same way of any other knowledgeable, technical responsible in military field ) a truly crucial segment with immeasurable potential benefical returns in the Aerospace Civil sector.

So what is the next generation Squall is Russian Navy working on , I mean not the export model but what RuN uses , will it have guidance , higher speed and range ?

, will it have guidance , higher speed and range ?

Yes, its speed will be increased over that of the domestic version (superior to 500 Km/h) so will its range

will it have guidance

Will ? Sometime i remain surprised that some "notions" could become so rooted in common immaginary (for effect of an odd, foundless information repeated over and over ) even when it result completely irreconcilable not only with any rational inference ,but even only with mere common good sense.

The only version of "Shkval" devoid of guidance (simply because it would have provided foreign entities with a deep understanding of the technical principles at the basis of the VA-111's propulsion ) was the export version that ,in fact ,was limited to 7 km engagement range (the maximum allowing a similar unguided cavitating torpedo to retain any type of effective operational employment) and only against surface targets.

This is a brief article with some historical facts on VA-111's development ,by Alexander Karpenko ,which could aid at realize as, already in Soviet times VA-111 ,in its advanced incarnations, was obviously never conceived as an unguided weapon .


http://vpk-news.ru/articles/3990

Has Squal ever been deployed on Russian subs post USSR?

I believe no.

Anybody know what the status is on the Russian Paket-E/NK anti-torpedo defense system??

Paket is used on the 20380 operationally.

TR1 wrote:Paket is used on the 20380 operationally.

That's good, i thought the project was abandoned.

Any other ships or just the 20380?

22350 is also going to use the Paket.
Not sure about anything else, but that is quite a lot of ships as is.

Russia is set to develop a sea-based missile defense program similar to the U.S. Aegis system, a senior defense industry official said on Friday.

Aegis, designed to intercept ballistic missiles at the post-boost phase and prior to reentry, is part of the U.S. national missile defense strategy.

“This task has been assigned to [the defense] industry,” said Anatoly Shlemov, head of the state defense contracts department at the United Shipbuilding Corporation.

Aegis analogs are being developed at companies affiliated with PVO Almaz-Antei [an air defense concern],” he said.

He declined to elaborate citing the classified nature of the topic.

http://en.rian.ru/military_news/20120831/175538466.html

I honestly dont think the shkval is an effective weapon now and wont be in the future due to:
1. its extremely short range. A seahawk helicopter would destroy the submarine long before its in range to fire the shkval.
2. Its too noisy and will emmediately uncover the submarines approximate location.

I think AshMs like the klub and very long range high calibre torpedos are far more useful than submerged rockets.

I honestly dont think the shkval is an effective weapon now and wont be in the future due to:
1. its extremely short range. A seahawk helicopter would destroy the submarine long before its in range to fire the shkval.
2. Its too noisy and will emmediately uncover the submarines approximate location.

And anyone here honestly hope that your opinion will be totally shared by US Navy Command and those of its allied nations ,it would be a true dream realized
Unluckily i honestly believe that they share the opinion exactly opposite to yours.....



1) Shkval-E torpedo offered on international market is not only a vastly downgraded version of the first model of VA-111 (capable moreover to hit only surface units ) but also show an immensely simplified propulsion section just to prevent anyone to obtain ,from samples of this export version ,any technical information useful for develop, at its own time, a supercavitating torpedo version even only on par with the first domestic version.

2) Even this vastly downgraded unguided export version of the first model of VA-111 can represent a simply deadly weapon ,without any peer among competitors in the hands of a proficient operator.
The weapon ,in facts, assure the destruction of the attacked targets in spite of any defensive torpedo counter-measure on board for the simple reason that ,in virtue of its enormous speed ,it can literally proceed toward the computed intercept point in a totally unguided way (therefore totally immune to any soft-kill countermeasure) and still prevent the engaged ship to avoid the impact in any way; also the immensely more advanced and faster guided version can initiate the terminal , completely inertial, engagement phase toward the intercept point far outside the range of any anti-torpedo defensive countermeasure.
The only real defensive countermeasure against those class of weapons is represented by active anti-torpedo hard-kill defensive systems such as "Paket" ,anyhow with reduced threat's suppression chances; but ,at today ,exactly as for VA-111 torpedo, don't exist any western corresponding to Paket hard kill defensive system. )

A seahawk helicopter would destroy the submarine long before its in range to fire the shkval.

Dozen of different systems could be used to attempt to engage an enemy submarine .....if detected in first instance and....if detected long enough .
Several of those systems, wanting only to talk of conventional means, are hundreds of times more efficient than an Sh-60 (used mostly to deploy sonobuoys screens or to remotely investigate a "contact" at a speed of....170-180 km/h

Do you know, if you receive a remote contact from a sonobuoys barrier or a bottom MAD sensors or thermo-differential detector or even a distant submarine or ship, two or three RPK-7 "Veter" or 91R1 "Kalibr" going toward the coordinates at more than 1800 km/h or 2400 km/h have several hundreds of times more chances to destroy the detected enemy submarine before the contact go lost.

Returning to the real range of detection of enemy submarines (outside national sea areas covered by overlapping sensor systems) results obtained by the entire ASW screens of US NAvy CVBGs against even the most outdated foreign conventional submarines -several of which vastly inferior even to export models of first version ok Kilo class - are ......not perfectly encouraging.





This is a cute photo taken by the......Oberon-class !!! .... HMAS "Onslow" submarine of the Nimitz-class aircraft carrier USS "Carl Vinson" ,just before executing its simulated "kill" from ....300 yards after having surpassed totally undetected the surface and submarine screen of the CVBG










This is USS "Enterprise" ,in all its beauty, kindly eternalized by a photo from a German Type 206A












This instead is a lovely closing salutation ,before the kill, from the much more modern Type 212, SMG "S. Todaro" to the Nimitz-class aircraft carrier USS "Theodore Roosevelt" ,just seconds after having engaged also a destroyer of its escort







And so on with Australian Collin class, Chinese Song class , Dutch Zwaardvis-class etc…..

With VA-111-E (export version) torpedo any submarine, in the same conditions and operation time, would have been perfectly capable to engage the entire CVBG instead of one or two at maximum, with the absolute certainty ,not only that none of the attacked ships would have been capable to neutralize in any way the menace , but that the immensely reduced time for the target's destruction and the lack of need for any wire guidance wouldn't have conceded to them any window for execute a counter attack on the submarine .


"seahawk helicopter would destroy the submarine long before its in range to fire the shkval".......oh yes, yes, of course.

like a boss

Another doubt about russian weapons capability once again destroyed for good
However If an oliver perry FFG, P-3 orion, etc. do eventually locate a soviet submarine(lets say schuka-1 for example)and release the AS torps what kinds of countermeasures do the sovietsailors have at their diposal? Will we see the paket in the yasen and lada class?

If an oliver perry FFG, P-3 orion, etc. do eventually locate a soviet submarine(lets say schuka-1 for example)and release the AS torps what kinds of countermeasures do the sovietsailors have at their diposal? Will we see the paket in the yasen and lada class?

Paket ?

Likely you have completely lost mine point in calling Paket hard kill defensive system in the argumentation : Paket is required for neutralize SUPERCAVITATING torpedo, with speed in exceeds of 220 kn, against which neither maneuvering, neither soft kill countermeasures can achieve any effect.
At today a pr. 971 would never have the problem to confront a supercavitating torpedo for the simple reason that no "enemy" Navy has any of them in theirs inventory.

Returning to your question, i find it very strange because, by now, is a commonly accepted fact that, on average, Russian nuclear submarine's survivability is MUCH, MUCH GREATER than all theirs western counterparts.

The reasons contributing to that are several ,among which:


1) Significantly higher depth limit
2) Significantly higher speed and maneuverability
3) Double hull construction
4) Employment of higher yield steel ( AK-29 and Ak-32 steel since plain Cold War against the HY-60 and 80 used by US )
5) Extensive employment of titanium/titanium alloys
6) Much greater reserve buoyancy
7) Higher compartmentalization
Significantly lower magnetic signature
9) Superior level of automation and systems redundancy
10)Greater propulsion reactor's density (reduced chance of hit and of critical propulsion failure)

If we talk of the Akula class named in your question, we must add to what up said also:

1) Presence of the unique -not foreign analogues- MG-74/74M or MG-104 multispectral programmable decoy, capable to perfectly mimic submarine signatures, movements and behavior for more than an hour !!
2) Hydrodynamics polymers delivering systems (to greatly enhances ,momentarily, submarine outer hull's hydrodynamics coefficient so to avoid enemy torpedo eventually not seduced/outranged)


Just to provide a measure of the difficulty to hit a submarine proceding at high speed and great depth, is sufficient to remember that an APR-3/3M rocket propelled torpedo (also here we talk of a weapon with absolutely not western analogue) used also in anti-submarine variant of "Kaliber" missile, with a terminal engagement speed of about 100 knot ,about 2 times and half the speed of a Mk-46 torpedo..., and with significantly more powerful warhead than Mk-46 too, can engage targets with a maximum speed of 43 knot when this target proceed at depth greater than 290 m(naturally at the grow of the depth the Pk decrease accordingly)


But all of what said obviously make no difference for the US, for no other reason that the unique nations it attack (in big NATO coalitions ,always enjoying crushing numerical advantage and ,very often, only after years of insulating international embargo) are only immensely inferior ones equipped with few export versions of weapon systems 30-35 years older.

Next generation -5th- torpedo "Ломонос" and new generation of anti-torpoedo countermeasure МГ-124 "Бериллий" to be introduced within four years ; other programs in advancement too.



http://www.almaz.info/3124.html



Very likely the introduction of Pr. 885M, improved Yasen class, will follow the state test acceptance of those new generation weapons and defensive systems.

Nice Post Mindstorm , Was missing you in action for some time , Welcome back