Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Rate the ship - Kirov class cruisers

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Rate the ship - Kirov class cruisers

    One of my favorite warships, the still impressive Kirov.

    The Kirov class battlecruisers of the Russian Navy are the largest and heaviest surface combatant warships (i.e., not an aircraft carrier, assault ship or submarine) currently in active operation in the world. Originally built for the Soviet Navy, in Russia they are usually known by the designation Project 1144 Orlan (sea eagle).

    They are second in size only to aircraft carriers, and are similar in size to a World War I battleship. Because of this, the ships are sometimes known as battlecruisers in the West. It is more appropriate to consider Kirov an oversized guided missile

    Displacement: 24,300 tons standard, 28,000 (full load)
    Length: 252 m (827 ft)
    Beam: 28.5 m (94 ft)
    Draft: 9.1 m (30 ft)
    Propulsion: 2-shaft CONAS, 2 KN-3 nuclear propulsion with 2 GT3A-688 steam turbines
    140,000 shp[1]
    Speed: 32 knots (59 km/h)
    Range: 1,000 nautical miles (2,000 km) at 30 knots (56 km/h) (combined propulsion),
    unlimited at 20 knots (37 km/h) on nuclear power
    Complement: 710
    Sensors and
    processing systems: Radars (NATO reporting name):
    Voskhod MR-800 (Top Pair) 3D search radar, foremast
    Fregat MR-710 (Top Steer) 3D search radar, main mast
    2 Palm Frond navigation radar, foremast
    Sonar:
    Horse Jaw LF hull sonar


    Horse Tail VDS (Variable Depth Sonar)
    Armament: 20 P-700 Granit (SS-N-19 Shipwreck) AShM
    14 SS-N-14 Silex ASW cruise missiles (Ushakov only)
    12x8 (96) S-300PMU Favorit SA-N-6 Grumble surface-to-air missiles (Ushakov, Lazarev, Nakhimov)
    96 S-400 (SA-NX-20 Gargoyle) long-range SAM (Pyotr Velikhy)
    192 9K311 Tor (SA-N-9 Gauntlet) point defense SAM
    44 OSA-MA (SA-N-4 Gecko) PD SAM
    2x RBU-1000 305 mm ASW rocket launchers
    2x RBU-12000 (Udav-1) 254 mm ASW rocket launchers
    1 twin AK-130 130 mm/L70 dual purpose gun (2x AK-100 100 mm/L60 DP guns in Ushakov)
    10 533 mm ASW/ASuW torpedo tubes, Type 53 torpedo or SS-N-15 ASW missile
    8x AK-630 hex gatling 30 mm/L60 PD guns (Ushakov, Lazarev)
    6x CADS-N-1 Kashtan missile/gun system (Nakhimov, Pyotr Velikhy)
    Armour: 76 mm plating around reactor compartment, light splinter protection
    Aircraft carried: 3 helicopters
    Aviation facilities: Below-deck hangar


    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirov_class_battlecruiser
    27
    Excellent
    29.63%
    8
    Good
    44.44%
    12
    Satisfactory
    14.81%
    4
    Average
    11.11%
    3

    The poll is expired.

    Give me a fast ship and the wind at my back for I intend to sail in harms way! (John Paul Jones)

    Initiated Chief Petty Officer
    Hard core! Old School! Deal with it!

  • #2
    Quite easily the most impressive non-aircraft carrier vessel ever built since the days of the battleship. And quite capable of ruining an entire navy's day on it's own.
    Standing here, I realize you were just like me trying to make history.
    But who's to judge the right from wrong.
    When our guard is down I think we'll both agree.
    That violence breeds violence.
    But in the end it has to be this way.

    Comment


    • #3
      She's certainly a beautiful ship.The only reason I couldn't vote "excellent" is because I think it would lose points for lack of maintenence and poorly trained crews.
      ALL LIVES SPLATTER!

      BLACK JEEPS MATTER!

      BLACK MOTORCYCLES MATTER!

      Comment


      • #4
        It may look impressive and stir memories of the battleships of old, but this ship is a paper tiger. The cost would have been well spent on 3-4 smaller ships that provide twice as much capabilities. However, like all battleships in the age of the airplane, it is good for: showing the flag, an Admiral's flagship, intimidation.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by IDonT4 View Post
          It may look impressive and stir memories of the battleships of old, but this ship is a paper tiger. The cost would have been well spent on 3-4 smaller ships that provide twice as much capabilities. However, like all battleships in the age of the airplane, it is good for: showing the flag, an Admiral's flagship, intimidation.
          The same could be said for fleet carriers and cruisers.
          Standing here, I realize you were just like me trying to make history.
          But who's to judge the right from wrong.
          When our guard is down I think we'll both agree.
          That violence breeds violence.
          But in the end it has to be this way.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Czin View Post
            The same could be said for fleet carriers and cruisers.
            Not really. Large super carriers have an economies of scale that smaller "harrier carrier" lack such as the ability to operate multiple types of aircraft, faster tempo rates, better AEW, and more flexibility from large numbers of aircraft. Three Invincible Class carriers could not operate at the same level as a single Nimitz class carrier. These three carrier, on aggregate, would cost more to man and operate.

            As for cruiser, in the US Navy the difference between cruisers and destroyers is not tonnage and weapons suite but the capability to have "flag" capabilities. That means the cruiser has the necessary C4I suite to effectively command a flotilla of ships and aircraft. The latest Burke derivative, the Korean KDX III destroyer, is larger than the Ticonderoga cruisers.
            Last edited by IDonT4; 21 Apr 10, 16:07.

            Comment


            • #7
              Each Slava class cruiser has 16x SS-N-12 Sandbox missiles which are quite similar to the SS-N-19s on the Kirov. You can buy 2 Slavas for the displacement (a reasonable cost proxy) of a Kirov.

              So 32 ASMs vs 20 plus the added durability of 2 hulls rather than 1.

              Slava also has the same SA-N-6 AA system

              So why have a Kirov when, for only perhaps a little more cost, you can have two Slavas?
              My board games blog: The Brass Castle

              Comment


              • #8
                Paper tiger. It was never proven capable, but scared the poop out of potential enemies. The class seemed to have many maintenance issues.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by The Land View Post
                  Each Slava class cruiser has 16x SS-N-12 Sandbox missiles which are quite similar to the SS-N-19s on the Kirov. You can buy 2 Slavas for the displacement (a reasonable cost proxy) of a Kirov.

                  So 32 ASMs vs 20 plus the added durability of 2 hulls rather than 1.

                  Slava also has the same SA-N-6 AA system

                  So why have a Kirov when, for only perhaps a little more cost, you can have two Slavas?
                  A single Kirov can send an enemy fleet scattering in fear by simply showing up due to it's large and imposing frame. And a Kirov is more well defended against enemy assault. A single Kirov could sink the entirety of a small nation's navy fairly easily and heavily damage a large one like Britain's. Plus, more room for the plush and comfortable Admiral's quarters.
                  Standing here, I realize you were just like me trying to make history.
                  But who's to judge the right from wrong.
                  When our guard is down I think we'll both agree.
                  That violence breeds violence.
                  But in the end it has to be this way.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    [QUOTE=Czin;1473399]A single Kirov can send an enemy fleet scattering in fear and is equipped with Russia's supersonic uber-long ranged missiles... A single Kirov could sink the entirety of a small nation's navy fairly easily and heavily damage a large one like Britain's.[quote]

                    ... and 2 Slavas could do these things just as well


                    Plus, more room for the plush and comfortable Admiral's quarters.
                    That might be the point. :-)
                    My board games blog: The Brass Castle

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Czin View Post
                      A single Kirov can send an enemy fleet scattering in fear by simply showing up due to it's large and imposing frame.
                      Unless that enemy is the US,and then you have a sunk Kirov.
                      ALL LIVES SPLATTER!

                      BLACK JEEPS MATTER!

                      BLACK MOTORCYCLES MATTER!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Czin View Post
                        A single Kirov can send an enemy fleet scattering in fear by simply showing up due to it's large and imposing frame. And a Kirov is more well defended against enemy assault. A single Kirov could sink the entirety of a small nation's navy fairly easily and heavily damage a large one like Britain's. Plus, more room for the plush and comfortable Admiral's quarters.
                        During the Georgian War, the Russian Black Sea fleet did exactly what you describe with a cheaper Slava cruiser. You do not need a Kirov for that, in fact, a Slava Cruiser was over kill in itself.

                        Secondly, a Kirov cruiser would have a hard time dispatching a regional naval power like the Royal Navy. The more likely scenario is for it to steam in circles trying to find its target only to be sunk by a stalking SSN.

                        Kirov is good at showing the flag, but of you really want someone to keep their navy at harbor, you need a SSN.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Based on the SHIP itself and not the maintenance or training the ship has to be excellent. Which is how I voted. Now if took into consideration the Soviet/Russian Navy problems she'd go down in rating.
                          Eagles may fly; but weasels aren't sucked into jet engines!

                          "I'm not expendable; I'm not stupid and I'm not going." - Kerr Avon, Blake's 7

                          What didn't kill us; didn't make us smarter.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            A good flagship for a task force or for an amphib fleet, but not a wholly superior design. 2 smaller vessels could cover twice the sealanes, making this ship only useful to an offensively minded force. I imagine such a vessel being used to intimidate a small nation's navy into submission, or as the 'heavy hitter' in a strike force against a coast, covering the smaller gunships. In a full-on fleet action against a similarly modern navy, the Kirov would get P0wn3d (yes I went there) by any Carrier Air Wing, or by an SSN. I guess one could use it like the Yamato and make a suicide run against the entire enemy fleet, but I can't see it being more effective overall than having 2 smaller vessels.
                            Tacitos, Satrap of Kyrene

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by TacCovert4 View Post
                              A good flagship for a task force or for an amphib fleet, but not a wholly superior design. 2 smaller vessels could cover twice the sealanes, making this ship only useful to an offensively minded force. I imagine such a vessel being used to intimidate a small nation's navy into submission, or as the 'heavy hitter' in a strike force against a coast, covering the smaller gunships. In a full-on fleet action against a similarly modern navy, the Kirov would get P0wn3d (yes I went there) by any Carrier Air Wing, or by an SSN. I guess one could use it like the Yamato and make a suicide run against the entire enemy fleet, but I can't see it being more effective overall than having 2 smaller vessels.

                              Very good!
                              Give me a fast ship and the wind at my back for I intend to sail in harms way! (John Paul Jones)

                              Initiated Chief Petty Officer
                              Hard core! Old School! Deal with it!

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X