What's new

Vietnam Defence Forum

The cause of mass animal deaths (especially those living water) can be quite difficult to determine. Take the case of the mass Asian carp fish deaths in Kentucky a few years back. The experts were baffled, and could only theorized that the fish died because the water was highly oxigenated (!) Why other fish species didn't die was un-explainable.

Sure, I understand, but in this case there is some interesting evidence, like the fact that a diver saw a yellow cloud coming out from the Formosa pipe and the original declarations from Formosa saying that Vietnam had to choose between fish and a modern steel industry. Also the fact that the pipe was set up in secret and without approval from the relevant environmental organization. You don't operate in such a way if you plan to comply with the rules.

But nothing of this would derail my main points. Brahmos is supersonice, Kh-59 subsonic and so Brahmos would be providing additional capability.

I'm not trying to derail anything man, just adding information.

ship_2477.jpg


r44.jpg

Those are the pics I was referring to.
 
Those are the pics I was referring to.
Ok, so that is only a conversion in that the Matka's original missile system was swapped out for more modern Uran's. The Matka itself is a different design from Osa (although there are similarities and connections)

Hershen class (project 206) torpedo boat > Turya class (project 206M) torpedo hydrofoil > Matka class (project 206.6) missile hydrofoil

The Project 206 family of fast attack craft (NATO: Shershen, Turya, and Matka class) are based on the Project 205 and share a common engine room design.

http://russianships.info/eng/warfareboats/
 
Navy venerable Zis 3. Fairly old but quite mobile and a pretty fast fring rate
 

Attachments

  • Zis 3 76mm field gun.jpg
    Zis 3 76mm field gun.jpg
    129.4 KB · Views: 69
Vietnam paddles its own Kayak

By Douglas Barrie, Senior Fellow for Military Aerospace, and Tom Waldwyn, Research Analyst for Defence and Military Analysis

Date: 05 June 2016

Vietnam is believed to be embarking on a programme to produce its own variant of a missile based on the Russian Zvezda-Strela 3M24 Uran (SS-N-25 Switchblade). While the details of how it will be produced are not yet clear, the programme would be a boost to local industry. It would also be likely to simplify logistics support for the 3M24s already being operated by the Vietnam People’s navy, write Douglas Barrie and Tom Waldwyn.


cnqp-viet-nam-2015-bung-no-bang-ten-lua-va-vu-khi-moi-hien-dai.jpg




Vietnam has become the second Asia-Pacific nation, it would appear, to embark on the indigenous production of a missile based on the Russian Zvezda-Strela 3M24 Uran (SS-N-25 Switchblade). The first is North Korea, which has previously shown footage of a missile that closely resembles the Russian medium-range anti-ship weapon.

Unlike Pyongyang, however, Hanoi has been at least slightly more forthcoming as to the nature of its own programme. The Vietnamese variant of the missile is designated the KCT 15 and is the result of technology transfer from Russia. Whether this represents a full production capacity, or licensed final assembly, or something in between, has yet to become clear. Vietnam and Russia began to discuss local ‘manufacture’ of the 3M24 in 2011–12. Zvezda-Strela, the design house behind the 3M24, is part of Russia’s Tactical Missiles Corp.

The initial acquisition of the 3M24 from Russia was aimed at improving the anti-surface warfare capacity of the Vietnam People’s Navy. Regional maritime tensions are propelling naval weapons-programme acquisitions. Vietnamese manufacture of its version of the 3M24 will help develop local industry and likely simplify logistics support. The unit cost of a round will probably be reduced.

How North Korea acquired the technology to support its programme, possibly known as the KN-01, has yet to be ascertained.

The KCT 15 was first shown publicly in late 2015 as part of a display of defence technology that also included air defence surveillance radar. The missile was shown alongside a twin launcher for surface vessels. The Vietnamese navy already operates the 3M24, with the missile providing the main anti-ship armament of theGepard-class frigate. The navy operates two of this class at present with a further two under construction. TheSwitchblade is also the main armament of the navy’s six Tarantul V fast missile boats, as well as its single BPS-500 corvette.

The active radar-guided 3M24 is in service with a number of nations apart from Russia, including India and Algeria. An air-launched variant, the Kh-35 (AS-20 Kayak) has also been integrated on helicopters and on fixed-wing aircraft for the maritime strike role. Work on the basic 3M24 began in the early 1980s and it had a maximum range of 130km, but some local press reports suggest the KCT 15 has around double this range.


ngam-dan-vu-khi-viet-nam-cai-tien-va-che-tao-hinh-3_zpsc0rbdnbj.jpg



There has also been a suggestion in the media that the licence agreement with Russia covers three versions of the missile. These could conceivably cover the air-launched Kh-35 and also the coastal defence variant, the 3K60 Bal, known in the West as the SSC-6 Sennight.

The KCT 15 that was put on display differed from the basic 3M24 in that there was no inlet duct between the mid-body wing for the turbofan engine. An upgraded air-launched variant, known as the Kh-35U, has a revised layout for the engine, which is repositioned in an enlarged rear-fuselage section. This provides for greater fuel capacity and extends the missile’s maximum range. The KCT 15 shown, however, did not correspond to this configuration. A further option is that the design has a flush intake, although this was not visible on the missile displayed.
 
Vietnam Kct-15 AShM is a clone of Russia´s Kh-35E. turbofan engine, range 130 km, top speed Mach 0.8, 10 m sea skimming en route to target, 4 m on final approach, active radar seeker. a recent article states Russia has just completed the missile transfer technology to Vietnam, with all three variants (launched by air, sea and land platforms).

Interestingly, as the article states, also, Russia allows Vietnam to produce maximum 3,000 Kct-15, and to sell missile surplus to friendly countries.

@Carlosa
@Penguin
@Aqsuperman

what do you think, do we need 3,000 Kct-15 AShM?


ten-lua-chong-ham-do-viet-nam-san-xuat-co-gi-dac-biet-bb-baaad5GL2p.png
 
Overkill. No, I don´t think we need to produce 3,000 missiles, waste of money and resources.

Though we need more missiles. Ba Son shipyard manufactures Molynia corvettes for the Navy till day. the shipyard is in the process of moving to a new location, with facilities capable to manufacture warships of 2,000 tons. a Molynia carries 16 missiles. Assuming the shipyard develops a new warship based upon Molniya, but with 2,000 tons instead of 560 tons displacement. such warship would carry 32 missiles.

http://e.vnexpress.net/news/news/vi...-naval-vessels-with-new-shipyard-3402769.html


20160421-bao-nga-tau-ten-lua-molniya-viet-nam-an-dut-type-022-tq-nbsp-2.jpg





20160421-bao-nga-tau-ten-lua-molniya-viet-nam-an-dut-type-022-tq-nbsp-4.jpg
 
...and assuming they were to have the proper ISR assets (I guess when they get the C-295 AWACS), those Brahmos can reach the periphery of the Spratlys and if they are launched from ships not far from the coast, they can still reach deep into the Spratlys. That would not be a bad capability to have at all.

It’s true that VN is seriously looking at the C-295 AEW and I personally think VN will eventually acquire it, but here is a question: how do you think C-295 AEW can be integrated with Su-30 carrying Brahmos or any other Russian platforms? VN does not possess the required source codes and capability to intergrate the system themselves without Russian involvement/permissions, and its also very unlikely that Russia and any US/NATO allies/partners with share codes and cooperate together for VN.

It is clear, and VPA officials has already revealed, that VN wants an integrated C4ISTAR system. And VN’s decision (before it was cancelled for other reasons) to go for a western ship with western sensors and missiles already hinted at what direction the navy wanted to go for. The soon to be 6 P3C orders will also confirms this. Basically, the core of the naval arm of the VPA will be built around an integrated C4ISTAR system, and this networked C4ISTAR system is not going to be Russian-based. Of course, this could change if Russian decides to go one-up and offer something more delicious (which I doubt).

So, the Gepards are just a (overpriced) stop gap purchase, if Brahmos is purchased then it could be seen as a stop gap solution too, “domestic” Kh-35 is just a stepping stone for Viet engineers to gain knowledge and experience. If India couldn’t get all the source codes and authority for the Brahmos that they spent a lot of money on, then don’t expect too much for the VN “domestic” Kh-35 in terms of ToT.

So the Gepards/Brahmos/Uran, etc. will not be the core of the VPA navy’s long term plan. The core plan will be based around that C4ISTAR system, and we already have some clue what will be in that system...western radars and sensors, non-Russian frigates, C-295 AEW, western ASW platforms like P3Cs.

The more interesting weapons to ponder about are what the non-Russian missiles and armaments are going to be, what will that non-Russian radars and sensors going to be? what will the naval F/A-18V be armed with? remember US based missiles will not be the only option. There are plenty of other options too such as NSM, Exocet (VPA’s first decision), Gabriel V, etc. So I recommend you explore into this direction.
 
It’s true that VN is seriously looking at the C-295 AEW and I personally think VN will eventually acquire it, but here is a question: how do you think C-295 AEW can be integrated with Su-30 carrying Brahmos or any other Russian platforms? VN does not possess the required source codes and capability to intergrate the system themselves without Russian involvement/permissions, and its also very unlikely that Russia and any US/NATO allies/partners with share codes and cooperate together for VN.

It is clear, and VPA officials has already revealed, that VN wants an integrated C4ISTAR system. And VN’s decision (before it was cancelled for other reasons) to go for a western ship with western sensors and missiles already hinted at what direction the navy wanted to go for. The soon to be 6 P3C orders will also confirms this. Basically, the core of the naval arm of the VPA will be built around an integrated C4ISTAR system, and this networked C4ISTAR system is not going to be Russian-based. Of course, this could change if Russian decides to go one-up and offer something more delicious (which I doubt).

So, the Gepards are just a (overpriced) stop gap purchase, if Brahmos is purchased then it could be seen as a stop gap solution too, “domestic” Kh-35 is just a stepping stone for Viet engineers to gain knowledge and experience. If India couldn’t get all the source codes and authority for the Brahmos that they spent a lot of money on, then don’t expect too much for the VN “domestic” Kh-35 in terms of ToT.

So the Gepards/Brahmos/Uran, etc. will not be the core of the VPA navy’s long term plan. The core plan will be based around that C4ISTAR system, and we already have some clue what will be in that system...western radars and sensors, non-Russian frigates, C-295 AEW, western ASW platforms like P3Cs.

The more interesting weapons to ponder about are what the non-Russian missiles and armaments are going to be, what will that non-Russian radars and sensors going to be? what will the naval F/A-18V be armed with? remember US based missiles will not be the only option. There are plenty of other options too such as NSM, Exocet (VPA’s first decision), Gabriel V, etc. So I recommend you explore into this direction.

Good question. It really depends on Russia releasing the information needed so that they can be integrated in a western based C4ISTAR system. As a example, India asked Russia to integrate the R-73 air to air missile with the Tejas systems and Russia asked for so much money that India in the end decided to go with Python 5 instead of R-73. India also decided to use the Derby-ER for the long range air to air. That is also a very good option for VN for the air to air missiles for the F-16 / F-18. The Python 5 and Derby ER is a good combo and the Python and Derby are already used for Spyder.

As I used to hear, the tech transfer for the KH-35 didn't include the propulsion and the seeker and those are the most important parts. Its always been my feeling that is difficult to get real tech transfer from Russia (other than to China).

I think its better for VN to go the western route as it seems to be going and to rely on Israeli and Indian equipment and assistance as much as possible. Those two have a lot of experience in dealing with Russian equipment and at the same time to push Russia hard to release the information needed.

VN did a great job itself with the set up of the integrated network for air surveillance (or whatever the proper name is). The Viettel people integrated all the radars and air defense systems in Vietnam into that network and they did it very fast. I guess those skills are going to be needed again to integrate Russian and western equipment for the upcoming C4ISTAR system. Part of that system is already done and it was done by Viettel, so lets hope that they can handle the job.

I don't know what other systems will be chosen for the American jets. I only have a clear expectation for the Python / Derby ER combo, I think that makes sense. Other than that, I don't know. There are many options, but I think India and Israel can help a lot in that area.

So, the Gepards are just a (overpriced) stop gap purchase

That's exactly how I feel about the Gepard and the fact that they want to keep buying them makes no sense to me.

So the Gepards/Brahmos/Uran, etc. will not be the core of the VPA navy’s long term plan. .

Its very clear to me that the road map for Vietnam has the name India written all over. India, same as Vietnam, used to buy everything from Russia and now just integrates the best from Russia, Israel and other western tech at the same time that they develop their own tech and use tech transfer. That's the model for Vietnam and once India develops / integrate something, they can also give it to VN. Simple.

It’s true that VN is seriously looking at the C-295 AEW and I personally think VN will eventually acquire it, but here is a question: how do you think C-295 AEW can be integrated with Su-30 carrying Brahmos or any other Russian platforms? VN does not possess the required source codes and capability to intergrate the system themselves without Russian involvement/permissions, and its also very unlikely that Russia and any US/NATO allies/partners with share codes and cooperate together for VN..

I don't think its necessary for Russia to share the source code of their systems, they just need to provide some technical information that is needed in order to integrate them with western equipment.

I was just reading yesterday that the Viettel engineers integrated the Pantsyr system into the air surveillance network, so it might not be as difficult as you think, but I certainly don't know enough to say how easy or difficult it is.
 
Last edited:
Overkill. No, I don´t think we need to produce 3,000 missiles, waste of money and resources.

Though we need more missiles. Ba Son shipyard manufactures Molynia corvettes for the Navy till day. the shipyard is in the process of moving to a new location, with facilities capable to manufacture warships of 2,000 tons. a Molynia carries 16 missiles. Assuming the shipyard develops a new warship based upon Molniya, but with 2,000 tons instead of 560 tons displacement. such warship would carry 32 missiles.

http://e.vnexpress.net/news/news/vi...-naval-vessels-with-new-shipyard-3402769.html


20160421-bao-nga-tau-ten-lua-molniya-viet-nam-an-dut-type-022-tq-nbsp-2.jpg





20160421-bao-nga-tau-ten-lua-molniya-viet-nam-an-dut-type-022-tq-nbsp-4.jpg

No need for 3000 but it also does not mean that VN paid for 3000 either. Its just the upper limit of what the contract allows.
 
A beautiful shot of our Kilo. A submarine pen would be under execution now........hopefully.
 

Attachments

  • 2 nice kilo subs.jpg
    2 nice kilo subs.jpg
    316.1 KB · Views: 52
why is it a must to have the source code of a particular system?

the P-3 patrol aircraft can report when spotting the x-y-z coordinates of enemy ships and submarines to the military command, which will in turn coordinate our fighter jets, surface warships and submarines to hunt them. when our people visited the US Marines base in the Pacific, they also seemed having interest on that flying shark UAV :D



Vietnam%2Bdelegates.jpg
 
Ba Son shipyard

The actual naval shipyard Ba Son is located in Saigon. with buildings and warehouses dated back the Nguyen dynasty.

BbW68Rm.jpg





the new $890 million Ba Son naval shipyard will be located in Vung Tao, a more strategic place lying direct close the SC Sea. since September 2015 under construction, expected to be complete in early 2018. It will be capable of building naval vessels with displacement of 500 to 2,000 tons and providing repair services for naval ships with displacement of up to 5,000 tons, contructing transport vessels of up to 70,000 DWT and repair transport ships of up to 150,000 DWT.

bason.jpg




once the old Ba Son is moved out, the domestic property developer Vinhome develops the prime area into a place for people with deep pocket.

tong-quan.jpg
 
Last edited:
why is it a must to have the source code of a particular system?

the P-3 patrol aircraft can report when spotting the x-y-z coordinates of enemy ships and submarines to the military command, which will in turn coordinate our fighter jets, surface warships and submarines to hunt them. when our people visited the US Marines base in the Pacific, they also seemed having interest on that flying shark UAV :D
Vietnam%2Bdelegates.jpg

There is no need to actually have the source code, just need some technical information that comes from the party that has the source code, Russia. Different platforms need to use the same communication protocols and need to exchange information. For example, a C-295 AWACS needs to be able to guide a Brahmos launched from A SU-30 to target, so that requires that all those different systems can interface together.
 
There is no need to actually have the source code, just need some technical information that comes from the party that has the source code, Russia. Different platforms need to use the same communication protocols and need to exchange information. For example, a C-295 AWACS needs to be able to guide a Brahmos launched from A SU-30 to target, so that requires that all those different systems can interface together.
exactly. what we need to know is the x-y coordinates of targets, be it a ship or airport, acquired by our spy aircraft, be it P-3 or Airbus AEW patrol planes. destroying targets by brahmos or our actual kalibre cruise missiles.


klub%2Bmissile.jpg
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom