Hi bigsarge. Sorry, but if you're learning from sub brief you are no longer a simple man. I am sure you're sophisticated and complex now. I mostly watch sub brief because it's fun. But educational too as you point out.
This is actually A LOT of firepower for this size of a ship, usually they have 32 VLS and thats it. They also manage to fix a freaking 130mm destroyer size canon onto the hull. I am really curious whats the crew department and storage is like.
Its endurance is stated to be around thirty days. As posted there is plenty of video of the interiors, crew quarters, etc. They are similar in many ways to what you find in western ships.
Yeah its impressive. Not really a blue water ocean going ship, more designed for shore and sea defense. Pretty limited endurance, but otherwise very effective and affordable.
@@Kenny-yl9pc 4,850 NM. But only 30 days. So for instance I live in NZ and we need to protect both our fisheries and the Pacific Island fisheries. 30 days is just not enough time. This is a fighting ship designed to go out and fight and then go home. NZ is looking perhaps at the Australian built Hunter class. Although they should consider the Daegu class from South Korea. It literally a quarter of the price. So of course we could double the fleet size.
@@bjorntorlarsson yes largely it is a case of optimising for its given role. The lack of endurance was not a mistake. Though endurance is not only for invasions. Many nations need a ship with good endurance to patrol vaste territorial waters, show the flag at foreign ports and participate in international events. NZ doesn't have any plans to invade anyone, but we have thousands of square KM to patrol, the Pacific islands to help out after natural disasters and need the range to participate in thing like Rimpac and anti piracy in the middle east. Lots of "tanks" didn't have turrets btw. Like the famous Stugg. Your probably talking about the S103. A very interesting tank. It's actually the only Swiss tank to not feature a turret.
Great information as always. I’ve been in for 10+ years and occasionally use your videos as a sort of an impromptu-UNCLASSIFIED info brief to my troops. It keeps them somewhat in the loop of global military news when we have excessive downtime (they always enjoy your vids as well). I know you have covered Chinese subs in the past. I would love to see videos on Chinese surface vessels as well. Thank you for putting these videos out!
Looks like a good ship. I would imagine that they've upgraded some things, though, especially since those computer consoles reminded me more of the 80s than of the 90s. In any case, I would never underestimate the military capacity of anyone, friend or current foe.
The lastest update about Severnaya Verf just came out last week with footage of 2 22350 in advance contruction phase, probably Amelko and Chichagov. They could be launch next year.
This is probably the most modern surface combatants currently in service with the Russian Navy, I've even seen a number of videos hyping it even proclaiming it as the 'Best Frigate in the World' weither that tittle is warranted is not something for me to decided. But it's certainly well armed and at the hands of well train and motivated crew its a formidable adversary.
20:14 The image says. The anti-torpedo of the package-E complex is designed to destroy torpedoes attacking the ship. It can work with excitement no higher than 5 points.
In US Navy Parlance, there are two types of ASW attacks from a Surface Ship, Deliberate and Urgent. When you have time to develop a well defined Fire Control Solution for your ASW Attack and are prosecuting it at length - that’s a Deliberate Attack. When you’re using an over the side ASW Torpedo - that’s an Urgent Attack. You’re trying to get a weapon in the water hoping to disrupt the sub’s attack. The torpedoes being bearing only would seem to bear this out.
The Paket-NK("Пакет-Э/НК") 330mm torpedo 20:37 is a very short-range antitorpedo that intercepts incoming torpedos within a range of up to 800 m and has a total range of up to 1400 m.
The only benefit to launching the ONIKS the way they do is that it wouldn't be blocked by a friendly ship if lets say they were doing underway replenishment and a ship was right alongside of them. These ONIKS missiles could jump up over the nearby ship and fly right over them towards their target.
Ya , that and it keeps a very low profile under radar search altitudes. In a direct attack sea skimming mode the missile would stay low from launch to strike. Its range while greatly reduced is still near 200km in a low, low profile. It would not be seen by by may radars at launch until it clears the horizon and even then it may be too low for many. In a long range land attack mode it takes a "traditional" vertical launch without the maneuver of turning so abruptly. A much larger arc...this allows for LACM to reach out 800 plus km. High high profile. It can also run high low etc. Russian navy does not conduct underway replenishment in any form like western navies and posses no replenishment ships that are comparable to a fast combat support ship of western navies.
9:55 many ships and aircraft have laser warning receivers that go off if you shoot a ranging pulse or guiding beam. Laser ranging or designation is not passive. If you want a good firing solution, you have to get the range somehow. The passive methods for ranging are error prone and inaccurate. One could use two cameras and use parallax. That's how the old stereoscopic rangefinders worked back before they had radar. You could get the range to another ship by measuring the camera down-angle to the waterline of the other ship and compensate for ownship roll. Or you could use a known distance on the target itself, say the length of the ship, guess the angle on bow and plug in the pixel count into the calculation. All of those have wide error margins. Alternatively you can fire a shot and see where it lands and adjust fire.
With modern imaging algorithms and high resolution angle sensors I would expect you could develop ranging functionality for ships that have at least two EOTS sensors fitted. And where they can both see the target. Couple that with a much longer baseline if those sensors are at either end of the ship and you could probably get a pretty solid range estimate better than even the old school coincidence rangefinders. Whether it’s good enough for a firing solution for a gun is something else. But you could probably have one good enough for a missile shot.
Great brief as usual. Why the classification as a Frigate? 130mm gun, full missile loadout and twin shafts would seem like a destroyer to me. Is it in the way they plan to use this class?
Yes, its a multirole support class, destroyer would have a lot more missiles and more powerful anti-air, like 60 + 60 and ofc better ew, radar, sonar and such. Russia reclassified a 1155 destroyer into a frigate after modernization. Similarly modernised cruiser Adm. Nakhimov may be seen as what navy would want in a modern destroyer (in a smaller hull).
very nice and superb presentation. Much Respect! Remember, the high supersonic speed of the Oniks makes it impossible for U.S. Navy to shoot down, but the best feature of the Oniks is that it is maneuverable in flight. The Russians have used it against american anti missile tech in Ukraine and an Oniks missile has never been shot down. In fact, the Ukrainian air force commander has said, in a moment of rare honesty that the Oniks in particular (the Zircon also maneuvers in flight at hypersonic speed of 9 mach)....can maneuver so dramatically that he thinks the Russians actually want to activate American air defense technology, in order to exhaust it, and then the Oniks goes to another target city altogether. Western open sources are terribly inaccurate, probably intentional, but I think the range of the Oniks is up to 500 KM. There is information to support this, but not from the American MIC, ....I havent' checked but would bet serious money that the Kalbres also maneuver in flight. The Russians don't want any missile that cannot dramatically maneuver on its way to the target. PS: the russians very recently put to sea in full service the 4th Gorshov super frigate. Henceforth all Gorshov's ships will be much larger than the first 4. They will be more like cruisers. I have heard that the ultimate plan for the larger boats will eventually number 8 in number. 12 of this class all told. Numbers 5 through 8 of the larger variety are now being constructed.
I have a question, how can the ship average age be 20 years old when they started building the first on in 2006/2007 and was commissioned in early 2010s and thats the first of 3 ships.
because its Russian, so in place of outright bs and to keep the idea of not being biased alive it gets worked in just much more subtle. He is by far more balanced then most but its clear he has bias and cant help it. He is also a sub guy when you watch those briefs you see his expertise come alive.
@@TP-ie3hj I have watched him before and I can tell the video has been made a little while back. But I am a fan of this ship, genuinely one of the best in the world and the bias is a bit frustrating, calling them 20 years old is like calling the US destroyers 40 years old... both of which is wrong.
@@hussain7675 Agree, Its hard and in this video he alludes to the fact he now defaults to Janes as the ultimate authority, so truly why bother just read or watch Janes. On the other hand Janes is not the ultimate source. This is a great ship. Its build times while long reflect some issues with sourcing equipment like engines yes but have far more to do with budgets. Russia cant afford to build an LCS waste of money. This is looked down on. Here we get the 20 years old, "we dont know if it can track that many targets" "The cannon had problems with reliability"...and the "console looks like 1990"... as well as Paket NK "we dont know if it can go after another torpedo." Its marketed as an anti torpedo weapon... open source, sold that way. So a lot is via omission or simply stating..."we dont know" as he does not have first hand knowledge. But takes everything else as fact. Like system x had problems...does he have first hand there? no, he read it. But when it comes to a torpedo that hunts other torpedos whos manufacture sales it for that purpose its "we dont know. " Its simple, if a positive for the Russians, its a "we dont know". if its a negative its a given fact. Thats clear. Still better than most on you tube. a great ship no doubt. Eurasia naval news if you have not watched his videos well done well researched. Some of the best info out there on Naval tech, I have not found better on you tube.
I know i'm a little laid, but i have some input after working on a danish shipyard working on danish frigates and so on. My imput is to where you said she wasn't built on a self-sufficient shipyard. I don't know how they work in russia, but in Denmark it can be pretty smart for a smaller shipyard to outsource some of the work. Where i work we use alot off outsourcing so the shipyard doesn't need too have so many people to pay then the yard isn't full. Hope it makes sense.
It's good for the economy to sub out contracts. One day I was delivering metals and I peeked inside and they were building HMMWVs. Another time I saw an airplane wing factory in an unsuspected place
Do you have information on the A-192M's effective range? I doubt it is capable of hitting targets, aerial or seaborne, past 10 kilometers...and that's a stretch. It's like saying the Bradley can attack targets out to 21 (or is it 22?) kilometers- because it's main gun can fire out to that distance at max elevation, but in reality it is much lower. Also- do you find your information online or 'some other source' (aka part of the reason why you used to get visits about the publicly available information you posted back in the days)?
Even Russian T-90Ms can hit targets at ranges of up to 10km since they have indirect fire capability (a fire control system that works like an artillery gun's). According to Rosoboronexport, A-192M has an effective range of km 23km against coastal and surface targets, and 18km against air targets. To put that in perspective, the 152mm gun of the old Msta-S SPH's standard HE round has an effective range of 24.7km, while their much newer 2S35 Koalitsiya-SV SPH's standard round has an effective range of up to 40km. Taking into account the very long caliber of the barrel, the relatively small HE round being fired, and the age of the gun's design, it's safe to say that those numbers are very realistic.
Your work is outstanding , always informative , interesting and often novel , people like you made the US submarine force the best in the world. Well done.
@@definitelyfrank9341 You can't use a 30 round per minute gun for a CIWS. The slowest CIWS in existence is 600 rpm. The Phalanx is 3,000-4,500 rounds per minute. ☮
@@McRocketIt serves as a long-range, high-accuracy, high-rate of fire, large-caliber flak gun. You need the high RPM for a CIWS because of the low caliber.
@@definitelyfrank9341 Other than a lucky hit? There is no way you are going to take out a missile coming in at Mach 1+ with a gun firing at one round every 2 seconds. Especially if the missile flies even a rudimentary evasive pattern. You think every, major navy builds CIWS's just for fun? I will not waste any more time discussing this with you. Believe whatever you wish. Bye, now. ☮
@@McRocketAnti-ship missiles typically speed up in their terminal phase and have a very predictable trajectory. Very few if any fly in a rudimentary evasive pattern in the terminal phase because their tiny radar needs to maintain a lock on its target. One 130mm air-burst round should honestly be enough to stop a mach 1 missile, assuming they detect it in time. ABMs are a good analogy to the 130mm gun; one absolutely massive and in-maneuverable missile being the country's only chance of salvation. Yet, nobody's saying that there's no point in investing hundreds of billions of dollars in them because they think they don't have the slightest chance of hitting their target. You've also got the 74mm OTO Malera naval gun being advertised as a gun able to engage anti-ship missiles. Hopefully, I've at made you reevaluate your opinion.
If my math is correct, those CWIS turrets have 6 seconds of firing time before needing to reload. Not sure if that’s a good design choice or not. It’s a lot of rounds in a few seconds, sure. But if the auto loader isn’t fast…..idk 🤔
If you wanted to you could be the modern version of Dracinifel, he only goes up to WW2 ships as so much stuff since then is still some form of secret its a bit of a pain for a outsider to research He is always asked about newer ships, and there isn't really anyone solid for him to recommended. Similarly if you are asked about older stuff you can shove folk his direction
And FYI he bought a old admiralty collection of prints and original slides so he wouldn't run into copyright problems, and as he crowdfunded the money for them, he in turn made them available to the public for free That's a enthusiast right there, not just someone reading out old ship specs online for RUclips bucks
If enhanced gorshkov has 64 vls cells and super gorshkov has 144 vls cells they should really make a 96 cell version so they can have modern frigates destroyers and cruisers
I am new to the channel and I have been binge watching episodes. If I missed this topic I am sorry however I would like your thoughts on this. There is a school of thought that the navy should put a Iowa class battleship back into service. Update the weapons systems and use it for freedom of navigation actions in the South China Sea. The thought being cost savings as it’s not a new ship, she should be able to play chicken like the Chinese navy likes to do, and it could soak up some hits if someone got trigger happy but the navy would not lose a new asset. Could you share thoughts on this idea?
The Iowas' engines are shot. Power plants, especially steam turbines and oil boilers, have about a 20-year active lifespan, and the Iowas have had about that out of mothballs. Add in that their armor scheme isn't really effective against modern missiles, and you'll basically need to rip off the superstructure, all of the armor decks, replace the power plant, then rip off and replace the entire internal armor belt before putting her back together. That's assuming you don't want to modify her primary weapons systems, which would be just as involved. It would literally be cheaper to build a new Iowa-sized combatant from the keel up. Leave the Iowas as museum ships.
there is a funny thing with your : "wahou they make very modern thing I'm impressed, look a this modernity, I look like us 30 years ago" you are probably very right, but is it still funny to listen to :)
Excellent presentation as always, You should've started the video with the voice of combat approved 🙂 on a serious note, not sure how the crew can perform damage control wearing shorts and short sleeve shirts while at sea.
Thinking that 200 sailors for a ship is a bit much, tho maybe that crew is required to operate the amount of systems existing on such a small frame of a ship.
Gorskhov doesn't have a Fregat-M2EM radar... pretty massive mistake minute into a video 5 minutes later claiming that UEC Saturn and their M90FR turbine developed because of sanctions is Ukrainian... amazing that a so called "subject matter expert" doesn't even know about Zorya-Mashproekt which is the Ukrainian company which originally made the turbines for Groskhov and stopped deliveries due to sanctions.
Can you make some video on Chinese ships, there is plenty to talk about, frigs, destroyers, ssk, LHD etc, they have built A LOT in recent years and isn't slowing down anytime soon. Russian Navy isn't really going to be real player anytime soon, PLAN on the other hand is entering the big leagues.
Perhaps not plastic, but the colour scheme of the interiors in mostly unchanged from soviet times because it was determined to be the least stressful to the sailors
I don’t think so, too small, and not enough missiles to be in equivalent replacement, although they could achieve somewhere effect by building multiple ships to make up the difference. But these also happened to be the biggest ships Russia can currently build on its own.
@@hummerskickass the largest are probably icebreakers, factory ships (for fish processing) and so on. Warships, on the other hand, tend to decrease in size due to the development of technology. Discussions are now underway on aircraft carriers - it is believed that this platform is losing potential due to a sharp increase in the range of means of destruction of ships, which are becoming available to an increasing number of countries, and therefore the location of the aircraft carrier group must be so far away that aircraft will have to fly 1000 miles just to arrive to the mission area, while hypersonic missiles fly the same 1000 miles in the opposite direction extremely quickly Therefore, it makes no sense for anyone to build huge ships, such ships are vulnerable to new types of weapons, primarily due to their small number. You need to build a lot of small ships with high potential and low cost, as always, continuous contradictions The military of different countries are abandoning large ships, not because they have ceased to be able to build them, but because it does not make any sense
The real story behind the Sergei Gorshkov class is that this is the size of warship the Russian navy could now afford following the much larger Kirov, Slava, Udaloy and Sovremenny classes because ships that large were beyond the present reach of the Russian Federation.
you mean to say that focusing more on economy growth, improved healthcare and living conditions vs over spending on military is a bad long term plan? tell me you are American without telling me
@@iwaswrongabouteveryhthing You are assuming that those are the priorities of the Putin Administration. I think a realistic assessment of his rule shows nothing of the sort; one has to remember that the Navy is not Russia's highest priority, Russia has been in the past as much as today a land power above all else. Additionally Putin knows that Russia has one vital piece of its military hardware that places it on par with the United States and that is it's nuclear arsenal.
@zoperxplex he inherited a collapsed country, picture the US defaulting on its debt and then rebuilding it. if MSM say he's the bad guy you know he must be doing something right. look at Russia's GDP each year, look at his BRICS direction. this growth has happened even with hundreds of Western sanctions. Mr putin only became the bad guy when he defended syria from US/israeli atrocities, eg. 1 million dead Iraqi civilians, Libya, afghan
@@zoperxplexyou can't say that not overspending on military is not a major goal of Putin admin. Military corporations have targets on how much % of their production have to be civilian. It was said that once major overhaul of military is done - military spending would decrease and they have to be ready for that (that was before war). For example anti-air producer now planning to make cars and trucks. Ew producer makes medical equipment. Even when P. agreed on tu-160m production he asked to also make a civilian supersonic plane (which is lunacy, but good example on how he thinks). Fleet is major part of nuclear forces - nuclear subs need cover and support, thats why so many frigates are being built (and some cruisers and destroyers undergoing upgrades). Major overhauls on all shipyards, but most also have to make civilian ships. And ofc nuclear is not only deterrent, whole military doctrine have antisymmetric approach to NATO, to inflict unreasonable losses before losing thus deterring from attack or having to rely only on nuclear.
There is an important error in this part, the diesel and turbine engines are entirely produced in Russia, the Saturn turbine is a new project produced after 2014, when Russia integrated Crimea and in retaliation Ukraine refused to sell the turbine engines, therefore Russia dominates 💯 production technologies.
I thought the Saturn M90Fr was produced in Rybinsk Russia. There are some other turbines of Ukranian origin, like for the Hind helicopter. Perhaps they were using imported parts?
It was joint development effort, so Saturn had all documentation and in 2018 production line was ready, in 2020 all trials on "new" turbines were done. So first two have M90FR made in Ukraine, third 22350 has "some parts" from Ukraine, rest have M90FR from Saturn.
also PALASH uses the GSh-6-30 which has between 4000-6000 r/min and it has two of it on a single unit so it makes it 8000-12 000 r/min and it has two units on both sides so your data is false
Its undergoing upgrade and 4 overhead 350t cranes are part of it. But it's 7 years from start and third contract (two previous failed), so this summer it was forced to pay for storage of said cranes (and bunch of 20t cranes).
Pretty typical Russian engineering with the focus on "bang for buck, maximum firepower for minimum cost, good fundamental design > highest super tech".
Engine is made in Russia or most of them...Its made in Saturn plant, witch made jet engines for their planes and helicopters...bigest problem for them was that Reductors made in Ukraine...because of that they have slow rate production...
![Felix "Unfair" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Oswujxm2Ag0/mqdefault.jpg)
I'm a simple man. I see a ship brief, I learn.
submersibles and briedables
😄@@strichtarn3228
@@strichtarn3228begone, you fiend!
Hi bigsarge. Sorry, but if you're learning from sub brief you are no longer a simple man. I am sure you're sophisticated and complex now. I mostly watch sub brief because it's fun. But educational too as you point out.
😂 agreed
I pay way more attention to these briefs than any I ever had when I was an air force intelligence officer.
That's a good looking ship - sleek smooth lines.
Russia does build pretty ships.
On the bottom of the sea it will look much better.
And the currents there will give it even sleeker lines!
Thanks!
You bet!
This is actually A LOT of firepower for this size of a ship, usually they have 32 VLS and thats it. They also manage to fix a freaking 130mm destroyer size canon onto the hull. I am really curious whats the crew department and storage is like.
Its endurance is stated to be around thirty days. As posted there is plenty of video of the interiors, crew quarters, etc. They are similar in many ways to what you find in western ships.
Yeah its impressive. Not really a blue water ocean going ship, more designed for shore and sea defense. Pretty limited endurance, but otherwise very effective and affordable.
@@greybuckleton What's the range i.e. nautical miles?
@@Kenny-yl9pc 4,850 NM. But only 30 days. So for instance I live in NZ and we need to protect both our fisheries and the Pacific Island fisheries. 30 days is just not enough time. This is a fighting ship designed to go out and fight and then go home. NZ is looking perhaps at the Australian built Hunter class. Although they should consider the Daegu class from South Korea. It literally a quarter of the price. So of course we could double the fleet size.
@@bjorntorlarsson yes largely it is a case of optimising for its given role. The lack of endurance was not a mistake. Though endurance is not only for invasions. Many nations need a ship with good endurance to patrol vaste territorial waters, show the flag at foreign ports and participate in international events. NZ doesn't have any plans to invade anyone, but we have thousands of square KM to patrol, the Pacific islands to help out after natural disasters and need the range to participate in thing like Rimpac and anti piracy in the middle east. Lots of "tanks" didn't have turrets btw. Like the famous Stugg. Your probably talking about the S103. A very interesting tank. It's actually the only Swiss tank to not feature a turret.
Great information as always. I’ve been in for 10+ years and occasionally use your videos as a sort of an impromptu-UNCLASSIFIED info brief to my troops. It keeps them somewhat in the loop of global military news when we have excessive downtime (they always enjoy your vids as well).
I know you have covered Chinese subs in the past. I would love to see videos on Chinese surface vessels as well.
Thank you for putting these videos out!
Seems a very capable platform if the crew can keep up and the mantaince is preformed
Always a treat to see your new episodes.
SO glad you're able to now afford the resources you need. Great to see the Patreon working for you!
Thanks
Welcome
I'm a land lubber but I love your channel
Thanks 😊👍🙏🇮🇳
Looks like a good ship. I would imagine that they've upgraded some things, though, especially since those computer consoles reminded me more of the 80s than of the 90s. In any case, I would never underestimate the military capacity of anyone, friend or current foe.
The lastest update about Severnaya Verf just came out last week with footage of 2 22350 in advance contruction phase, probably Amelko and Chichagov. They could be launch next year.
I've been waiting for this video for so long!! I love your briefs on modern Russian ships.
Notification just went off, and I automatically hit the 👍🏽button because I know it’ll be amazing content like it always is!!👍🏽
This is probably the most modern surface combatants currently in service with the Russian Navy, I've even seen a number of videos hyping it even proclaiming it as the 'Best Frigate in the World' weither that tittle is warranted is not something for me to decided. But it's certainly well armed and at the hands of well train and motivated crew its a formidable adversary.
20:14 The image says. The anti-torpedo of the package-E complex is designed to destroy torpedoes attacking the ship. It can work with excitement no higher than 5 points.
In US Navy Parlance, there are two types of ASW attacks from a Surface Ship, Deliberate and Urgent.
When you have time to develop a well defined Fire Control Solution for your ASW Attack and are prosecuting it at length - that’s a Deliberate Attack.
When you’re using an over the side ASW Torpedo - that’s an Urgent Attack. You’re trying to get a weapon in the water hoping to disrupt the sub’s attack. The torpedoes being bearing only would seem to bear this out.
The Paket-NK("Пакет-Э/НК") 330mm torpedo 20:37 is a very short-range antitorpedo that intercepts incoming torpedos within a range of up to 800 m and has a total range of up to 1400 m.
This is the first vessel in the World equipped to Fire hypersonic missiles no other nation did it before
No other nation even have hypersonic missiles let alone launch them
The only benefit to launching the ONIKS the way they do is that it wouldn't be blocked by a friendly ship if lets say they were doing underway replenishment and a ship was right alongside of them. These ONIKS missiles could jump up over the nearby ship and fly right over them towards their target.
Ya , that and it keeps a very low profile under radar search altitudes. In a direct attack sea skimming mode the missile would stay low from launch to strike. Its range while greatly reduced is still near 200km in a low, low profile. It would not be seen by by may radars at launch until it clears the horizon and even then it may be too low for many. In a long range land attack mode it takes a "traditional" vertical launch without the maneuver of turning so abruptly. A much larger arc...this allows for LACM to reach out 800 plus km. High high profile. It can also run high low etc.
Russian navy does not conduct underway replenishment in any form like western navies and posses no replenishment ships that are comparable to a fast combat support ship of western navies.
I would like to see a video on how a naval ship is built. Specifically the hull: how thick is it? Is it welded together?
Think there are couple of shipbuilding channels on RUclips.
The wild card question is how many Mw of power generation can the power plants supply to the ship should it need to mount future energy weapons.?
9:55 many ships and aircraft have laser warning receivers that go off if you shoot a ranging pulse or guiding beam. Laser ranging or designation is not passive. If you want a good firing solution, you have to get the range somehow. The passive methods for ranging are error prone and inaccurate. One could use two cameras and use parallax. That's how the old stereoscopic rangefinders worked back before they had radar. You could get the range to another ship by measuring the camera down-angle to the waterline of the other ship and compensate for ownship roll. Or you could use a known distance on the target itself, say the length of the ship, guess the angle on bow and plug in the pixel count into the calculation. All of those have wide error margins. Alternatively you can fire a shot and see where it lands and adjust fire.
With modern imaging algorithms and high resolution angle sensors I would expect you could develop ranging functionality for ships that have at least two EOTS sensors fitted. And where they can both see the target. Couple that with a much longer baseline if those sensors are at either end of the ship and you could probably get a pretty solid range estimate better than even the old school coincidence rangefinders. Whether it’s good enough for a firing solution for a gun is something else. But you could probably have one good enough for a missile shot.
10:04 Why does the console for the Zarya look like an 80's Midway arcade machine?
@@MrTylerStricker I didnt know that arcade machines comes with 2 LCD flat screens
Thanks for the primer.
Mistake, the P800 missile in Russian use, has a range of 600 km the export version has a range of 300 km...
Great brief as usual. Why the classification as a Frigate? 130mm gun, full missile loadout and twin shafts would seem like a destroyer to me. Is it in the way they plan to use this class?
Yes, its a multirole support class, destroyer would have a lot more missiles and more powerful anti-air, like 60 + 60 and ofc better ew, radar, sonar and such.
Russia reclassified a 1155 destroyer into a frigate after modernization. Similarly modernised cruiser Adm. Nakhimov may be seen as what navy would want in a modern destroyer (in a smaller hull).
Destroyers are a made up thing, everything is a frigate
The Brits got an 8,000-ton frigate.
@@definitelyfrank9341 the germans could build a 32.000 tons surface combatant and would probably call it the advanced heavy frigate or smth
@@guillaumefigarella1704True. And it'll only have 30mm auto cannons and stuff.
I noticed on the Palash gun they pulled the Kashtan concept of also having missiles on the defense turret.
All of Jive's.. well Aaron's stuff is awsome lol
Glad Janes sorted things out for you....
very nice and superb presentation. Much Respect! Remember, the high supersonic speed of the Oniks makes it impossible for U.S. Navy to shoot down, but the best feature of the Oniks is that it is maneuverable in flight. The Russians have used it against american anti missile tech in Ukraine and an Oniks missile has never been shot down. In fact, the Ukrainian air force commander has said, in a moment of rare honesty that the Oniks in particular (the Zircon also maneuvers in flight at hypersonic speed of 9 mach)....can maneuver so dramatically that he thinks the Russians actually want to activate American air defense technology, in order to exhaust it, and then the Oniks goes to another target city altogether. Western open sources are terribly inaccurate, probably intentional, but I think the range of the Oniks is up to 500 KM. There is information to support this, but not from the American MIC, ....I havent' checked but would bet serious money that the Kalbres also maneuver in flight. The Russians don't want any missile that cannot dramatically maneuver on its way to the target. PS: the russians very recently put to sea in full service the 4th Gorshov super frigate. Henceforth all Gorshov's ships will be much larger than the first 4. They will be more like cruisers. I have heard that the ultimate plan for the larger boats will eventually number 8 in number. 12 of this class all told. Numbers 5 through 8 of the larger variety are now being constructed.
very timely mate :)
To be fair, floating drydocks sink all the time. They are just able to come back up
Maybe he knows something you don’t
@ckfkkckfkfkf7697 a lot of people do. I wasn't implying anything, mostly being a smartass.
Sure. This is all well and good but can it have its radar and its radio on at the same time?
I have a question, how can the ship average age be 20 years old when they started building the first on in 2006/2007 and was commissioned in early 2010s and thats the first of 3 ships.
because its Russian, so in place of outright bs and to keep the idea of not being biased alive it gets worked in just much more subtle. He is by far more balanced then most but its clear he has bias and cant help it. He is also a sub guy when you watch those briefs you see his expertise come alive.
@@TP-ie3hj I have watched him before and I can tell the video has been made a little while back. But I am a fan of this ship, genuinely one of the best in the world and the bias is a bit frustrating, calling them 20 years old is like calling the US destroyers 40 years old... both of which is wrong.
@@hussain7675 Agree, Its hard and in this video he alludes to the fact he now defaults to Janes as the ultimate authority, so truly why bother just read or watch Janes. On the other hand Janes is not the ultimate source. This is a great ship. Its build times while long reflect some issues with sourcing equipment like engines yes but have far more to do with budgets. Russia cant afford to build an LCS waste of money. This is looked down on. Here we get the 20 years old, "we dont know if it can track that many targets" "The cannon had problems with reliability"...and the "console looks like 1990"... as well as Paket NK "we dont know if it can go after another torpedo." Its marketed as an anti torpedo weapon... open source, sold that way. So a lot is via omission or simply stating..."we dont know" as he does not have first hand knowledge. But takes everything else as fact. Like system x had problems...does he have first hand there? no, he read it. But when it comes to a torpedo that hunts other torpedos whos manufacture sales it for that purpose its "we dont know. " Its simple, if a positive for the Russians, its a "we dont know". if its a negative its a given fact. Thats clear. Still better than most on you tube.
a great ship no doubt. Eurasia naval news if you have not watched his videos well done well researched. Some of the best info out there on Naval tech, I have not found better on you tube.
@@TP-ie3hj I agree on everything you said, and I do watch Eurasia naval news.
The sonar runs Windows ME?
I know i'm a little laid, but i have some input after working on a danish shipyard working on danish frigates and so on.
My imput is to where you said she wasn't built on a self-sufficient shipyard.
I don't know how they work in russia, but in Denmark it can be pretty smart for a smaller shipyard to outsource some of the work. Where i work we use alot off outsourcing so the shipyard doesn't need too have so many people to pay then the yard isn't full.
Hope it makes sense.
So where do I stand if I’m inside this thing. Is there enough room?
It's good for the economy to sub out contracts. One day I was delivering metals and I peeked inside and they were building HMMWVs. Another time I saw an airplane wing factory in an unsuspected place
The sonar console "displays" seem to be Photoshoped on... :)
Do you have information on the A-192M's effective range? I doubt it is capable of hitting targets, aerial or seaborne, past 10 kilometers...and that's a stretch. It's like saying the Bradley can attack targets out to 21 (or is it 22?) kilometers- because it's main gun can fire out to that distance at max elevation, but in reality it is much lower.
Also- do you find your information online or 'some other source' (aka part of the reason why you used to get visits about the publicly available information you posted back in the days)?
Even Russian T-90Ms can hit targets at ranges of up to 10km since they have indirect fire capability (a fire control system that works like an artillery gun's).
According to Rosoboronexport, A-192M has an effective range of km 23km against coastal and surface targets, and 18km against air targets. To put that in perspective, the 152mm gun of the old Msta-S SPH's standard HE round has an effective range of 24.7km, while their much newer 2S35 Koalitsiya-SV SPH's standard round has an effective range of up to 40km.
Taking into account the very long caliber of the barrel, the relatively small HE round being fired, and the age of the gun's design, it's safe to say that those numbers are very realistic.
I thought they were being delayed due to the engine availability
They are developing a new engine. I think they're still testing hence why there are multiple keels in parallel construction.
Hey buddy, I don’t think that that is an AESA radar on that Gorshkov. I am pretty sure that it is a PESA. Mite wanna look into that.
Cool story, like always! And like for Chanel, like always 😊
Thank you so much 😀
pretty ship
I suppose the ship sea test would be doing in the Black Sea ?
Your work is outstanding , always informative , interesting and often novel , people like you made the US submarine force the best in the world. Well done.
Looks like there is no CIWS coverage directly forward.
No idea if that makes a big difference or not.
This was very interesting...thank you.
☮
Because you got the 30-rounds-per-minute 130mm cannon there.
@@definitelyfrank9341 You can't use a 30 round per minute gun for a CIWS.
The slowest CIWS in existence is 600 rpm.
The Phalanx is 3,000-4,500 rounds per minute.
☮
@@McRocketIt serves as a long-range, high-accuracy, high-rate of fire, large-caliber flak gun.
You need the high RPM for a CIWS because of the low caliber.
@@definitelyfrank9341 Other than a lucky hit?
There is no way you are going to take out a missile coming in at Mach 1+ with a gun firing at one round every 2 seconds. Especially if the missile flies even a rudimentary evasive pattern.
You think every, major navy builds CIWS's just for fun?
I will not waste any more time discussing this with you.
Believe whatever you wish.
Bye, now.
☮
@@McRocketAnti-ship missiles typically speed up in their terminal phase and have a very predictable trajectory. Very few if any fly in a rudimentary evasive pattern in the terminal phase because their tiny radar needs to maintain a lock on its target.
One 130mm air-burst round should honestly be enough to stop a mach 1 missile, assuming they detect it in time.
ABMs are a good analogy to the 130mm gun; one absolutely massive and in-maneuverable missile being the country's only chance of salvation. Yet, nobody's saying that there's no point in investing hundreds of billions of dollars in them because they think they don't have the slightest chance of hitting their target.
You've also got the 74mm OTO Malera naval gun being advertised as a gun able to engage anti-ship missiles.
Hopefully, I've at made you reevaluate your opinion.
Easily my favorite non-USN ship, looks good, seems capable on paper. Would love to have such frigates instead of the LCS we wasted money on.
"its not tested in battle yet" so US has tested its vessels already?
Do we see a repeat of the K-19 Widow maker?
Nope.
Drydock crane showed 10K ton crane or 10,000 tons. Sounds pretty heavy duty.
If my math is correct, those CWIS turrets have 6 seconds of firing time before needing to reload.
Not sure if that’s a good design choice or not. It’s a lot of rounds in a few seconds, sure. But if the auto loader isn’t fast…..idk 🤔
Likewise the phalanx or the goalkeeper.. but the palash ciws has a much higher rate of fire therefor a short burst might be enough for a single target
If you wanted to you could be the modern version of Dracinifel, he only goes up to WW2 ships as so much stuff since then is still some form of secret its a bit of a pain for a outsider to research
He is always asked about newer ships, and there isn't really anyone solid for him to recommended. Similarly if you are asked about older stuff you can shove folk his direction
And FYI he bought a old admiralty collection of prints and original slides so he wouldn't run into copyright problems, and as he crowdfunded the money for them, he in turn made them available to the public for free
That's a enthusiast right there, not just someone reading out old ship specs online for RUclips bucks
The basic design is really quite good. Russia has a major skilled labor (and corruption) problem, but some of their designs are quite good.
Corruption ? Russia has this and you have the LCS and Zumwalt, basically meaning you wasted more than a decade of ships and money
The Visby class has a similar behind doors torpedo tube deployment.
Ant its getting new torpedo tubes so there can be 2+2 stackking on each side
Any plans to make a video focusing on super cavitating torpedoes?
COOLSHIP
If enhanced gorshkov has 64 vls cells and super gorshkov has 144 vls cells they should really make a 96 cell version so they can have modern frigates destroyers and cruisers
UEC NPO SATURN- United Engine Corporation is purely Russian Engine manufacturer SATURN M90FR is a Russian Produced engine, not Ukrainian.
Saw her by souda bay back in march
I am new to the channel and I have been binge watching episodes. If I missed this topic I am sorry however I would like your thoughts on this.
There is a school of thought that the navy should put a Iowa class battleship back into service. Update the weapons systems and use it for freedom of navigation actions in the South China Sea. The thought being cost savings as it’s not a new ship, she should be able to play chicken like the Chinese navy likes to do, and it could soak up some hits if someone got trigger happy but the navy would not lose a new asset.
Could you share thoughts on this idea?
The Iowas' engines are shot. Power plants, especially steam turbines and oil boilers, have about a 20-year active lifespan, and the Iowas have had about that out of mothballs. Add in that their armor scheme isn't really effective against modern missiles, and you'll basically need to rip off the superstructure, all of the armor decks, replace the power plant, then rip off and replace the entire internal armor belt before putting her back together. That's assuming you don't want to modify her primary weapons systems, which would be just as involved. It would literally be cheaper to build a new Iowa-sized combatant from the keel up.
Leave the Iowas as museum ships.
No, no, no
there is a funny thing with your : "wahou they make very modern thing I'm impressed, look a this modernity, I look like us 30 years ago" you are probably very right, but is it still funny to listen to :)
Excellent presentation as always, You should've started the video with the voice of combat approved 🙂 on a serious note, not sure how the crew can perform damage control wearing shorts and short sleeve shirts while at sea.
Thinking that 200 sailors for a ship is a bit much, tho maybe that crew is required to operate the amount of systems existing on such a small frame of a ship.
I like low height of bridge, less rolling and crew fatique.
Love it.
KA-52 is the Alligator (Hokum-B NATO). Kamov is the manufacturer.
To refer to the Onyx as "pretty capable" doesn't do it justice. Until Zirkon, this was the most lethal anti-ship missile
There are plans to add 16 more VLS cells on the newer ships.
130mm firing at 30 rounds per minute? Good grief. That's absolutely mental.
Gorskhov doesn't have a Fregat-M2EM radar... pretty massive mistake minute into a video
5 minutes later claiming that UEC Saturn and their M90FR turbine developed because of sanctions is Ukrainian... amazing that a so called "subject matter expert" doesn't even know about Zorya-Mashproekt which is the Ukrainian company which originally made the turbines for Groskhov and stopped deliveries due to sanctions.
The question is the Russian crew well trained ?
Can you make some video on Chinese ships, there is plenty to talk about, frigs, destroyers, ssk, LHD etc, they have built A LOT in recent years and isn't slowing down anytime soon.
Russian Navy isn't really going to be real player anytime soon, PLAN on the other hand is entering the big leagues.
If you can't have a sub, I say frigate.
With the A-192M, they are clearly trying to replicate the OTO 127/64 LW Vulcano.
Well, it seems like it has everything. Then again after Moskva was sunk I've been a bit skeptical either of their gear or crew or both.
The Russians may be behind in sonar tech but at least they can build an operational frigate
Wonder if the Zarya M sonar also uses the same, formerly white, now aged yellow plastic of 90s computers?😁
I do feel it could use a good retrobrite.
Perhaps not plastic, but the colour scheme of the interiors in mostly unchanged from soviet times because it was determined to be the least stressful to the sailors
M90FR gas turbine egine is build in Russian, and all of it components aswell. Check your sources.
I Just bought an older JANEs book at the library sale for 5 dollars .
Would this be a replacement for a slava class cruiser? Same mid range AA capabilities, same anti ship capabilities, half the size of a Slava class?
Generally new ships in most navy's are getting smaller. So possibly
I don’t think so, too small, and not enough missiles to be in equivalent replacement, although they could achieve somewhere effect by building multiple ships to make up the difference. But these also happened to be the biggest ships Russia can currently build on its own.
@@hummerskickass the largest are probably icebreakers, factory ships (for fish processing) and so on. Warships, on the other hand, tend to decrease in size due to the development of technology.
Discussions are now underway on aircraft carriers - it is believed that this platform is losing potential due to a sharp increase in the range of means of destruction of ships, which are becoming available to an increasing number of countries, and therefore the location of the aircraft carrier group must be so far away that aircraft will have to fly 1000 miles just to arrive to the mission area, while hypersonic missiles fly the same 1000 miles in the opposite direction extremely quickly
Therefore, it makes no sense for anyone to build huge ships, such ships are vulnerable to new types of weapons, primarily due to their small number. You need to build a lot of small ships with high potential and low cost, as always, continuous contradictions
The military of different countries are abandoning large ships, not because they have ceased to be able to build them, but because it does not make any sense
Aaron and HI Sutton in one day. God loves me
I think the Russians really wish they had one of these in the Black Sea.
They already have ships with similar systems in the black sea. Just a smaller capacity.
They do, actually.
The real story behind the Sergei Gorshkov class is that this is the size of warship the Russian navy could now afford following the much larger Kirov, Slava, Udaloy and Sovremenny classes because ships that large were beyond the present reach of the Russian Federation.
You say this as if a modern navy would even need a ship the size of kirov anymore
you mean to say that focusing more on economy growth, improved healthcare and living conditions vs over spending on military is a bad long term plan?
tell me you are American without telling me
@@iwaswrongabouteveryhthing You are assuming that those are the priorities of the Putin Administration. I think a realistic assessment of his rule shows nothing of the sort; one has to remember that the Navy is not Russia's highest priority, Russia has been in the past as much as today a land power above all else. Additionally Putin knows that Russia has one vital piece of its military hardware that places it on par with the United States and that is it's nuclear arsenal.
@zoperxplex he inherited a collapsed country, picture the US defaulting on its debt and then rebuilding it.
if MSM say he's the bad guy you know he must be doing something right.
look at Russia's GDP each year, look at his BRICS direction.
this growth has happened even with hundreds of Western sanctions.
Mr putin only became the bad guy when he defended syria from US/israeli atrocities, eg. 1 million dead Iraqi civilians, Libya, afghan
@@zoperxplexyou can't say that not overspending on military is not a major goal of Putin admin. Military corporations have targets on how much % of their production have to be civilian. It was said that once major overhaul of military is done - military spending would decrease and they have to be ready for that (that was before war).
For example anti-air producer now planning to make cars and trucks. Ew producer makes medical equipment. Even when P. agreed on tu-160m production he asked to also make a civilian supersonic plane (which is lunacy, but good example on how he thinks).
Fleet is major part of nuclear forces - nuclear subs need cover and support, thats why so many frigates are being built (and some cruisers and destroyers undergoing upgrades). Major overhauls on all shipyards, but most also have to make civilian ships.
And ofc nuclear is not only deterrent, whole military doctrine have antisymmetric approach to NATO, to inflict unreasonable losses before losing thus deterring from attack or having to rely only on nuclear.
There is an important error in this part, the diesel and turbine engines are entirely produced in Russia, the Saturn turbine is a new project produced after 2014, when Russia integrated Crimea and in retaliation Ukraine refused to sell the turbine engines, therefore Russia dominates 💯 production technologies.
You seem to be not impressed with Russian seaman. Am i reading that correctly?
I thought the Saturn M90Fr was produced in Rybinsk Russia. There are some other turbines of Ukranian origin, like for the Hind helicopter. Perhaps they were using imported parts?
It was joint development effort, so Saturn had all documentation and in 2018 production line was ready, in 2020 all trials on "new" turbines were done. So first two have M90FR made in Ukraine, third 22350 has "some parts" from Ukraine, rest have M90FR from Saturn.
@@Daokl Yeah makes sense. Thanks man.
Does it spontaneously convert to submarine like the Moskwa?
Spelling much?
@@bobsemple9341don’t ask bots if they can spell, that’s like asking the US navy what happened to the zumwalt program
also PALASH uses the GSh-6-30 which has between 4000-6000 r/min and it has two of it on a single unit so it makes it 8000-12 000 r/min and it has two units on both sides so your data is false
If she had legitimate welders build it, she is on the map.
Now do a UDALOI
26 or 29knts. If they push the engines too hard and they break down where do they get the spares from Ukraine. I think not
100 ton crane is still not a very big crane, it would be much better if it was a gantry crane but still not that big.
Its undergoing upgrade and 4 overhead 350t cranes are part of it. But it's 7 years from start and third contract (two previous failed), so this summer it was forced to pay for storage of said cranes (and bunch of 20t cranes).
@@Daokl 350t much better and useful than 100t
Tip: Norwegian Skjold class. Worlds fastest👍
Pretty typical Russian engineering with the focus on "bang for buck, maximum firepower for minimum cost, good fundamental design > highest super tech".
after the buff this ship is quite useful against belgorod and the locked zircon is a nice bonus on top of it
Who would Sub Brief/Aaron be co-starring in an Avenger style OSINT team up movie. Im think PERUN, the Cheiftan, Covert Cabal, and Binkovs first off.
This ship can do everything? Can it function as a submarine like Moskva?
every ship can be a submarine once.
Engine is made in Russia or most of them...Its made in Saturn plant, witch made jet engines for their planes and helicopters...bigest problem for them was that Reductors made in Ukraine...because of that they have slow rate production...