Military Review

"Admiral of the fleet of Kasaton" in the completion of the "Northern shipyard" (photo)

47
The network has photos of the building of the patrol ship of the distant marine zone "Admiral fleet Kasatonov ”(project 22350).




The ship was laid down at the Severnaya Verf in November 2009 g, removed from the boathouse in October 2014, and launched on December 12 of the same year. The start of the test is scheduled for 2017.


Photos used:
Alexey Akentyev / VKontakte group "Ship in Art. Marinists of St. Petersburg"
47 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Spartanez300
    Spartanez300 22 December 2016 15: 20
    +2
    The fleet is waiting for a new ship.
    1. cniza
      cniza 22 December 2016 15: 23
      +4
      And not only this one. Successes.
      1. Vadim237
        Vadim237 22 December 2016 15: 35
        +8
        For one such, there are a dozen or two raid tugboats and boats - they are now in our top of construction.
        1. Pirogov
          Pirogov 22 December 2016 15: 39
          +2
          Quote: Vadim237
          For one such, there are a dozen or two raid tugboats and boats - they are now in our top of construction.

          It is impossible without them, although the slow construction of frigates, of course, afflicts.
      2. Zibelew
        Zibelew 22 December 2016 16: 02
        +8
        Already onboard number caused. The gun will be installed next year. We are waiting for import-substituting turbines, the stand is almost ready. With the gearbox, the main thing is that the Star does not disappoint, a complex unit. Unfortunately, the best shipyards and almost half of the military-industrial complex factories specializing in naval forces remained in Ukraine. Shipyards stopped, factories plundered and closed. But a modern frigate is not a boat, you cannot build it from the nearest forest by one engineering team - you need hundreds of subcontractors and tens of thousands of parts and components. Building chains of subcontractors and creating a full technological cycle of production is extremely long.
    2. NEXUS
      NEXUS 22 December 2016 15: 25
      +4
      Quote: Spartanez300
      The fleet is waiting for a new ship.

      The main thing is that, as with Essen, it did not work out of the dock.
      1. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 22 December 2016 15: 44
        +1
        Quote: NEXUS
        The main thing is that, as with Essen, it did not work out of the dock.

        Well, or like with Grigorovich when mooring in Sevastopol. smile
      2. Joker787
        Joker787 22 December 2016 15: 52
        +5
        In my opinion, the most important thing in this ship:
        diesel gas turbine power plant M55P as part of a diesel engine 10D49 and gas turbine engine M90FR.
        Finally, wait! drinks pour it all over the cup)))
        1. alexmach
          alexmach 22 December 2016 16: 39
          +3
          What are you waiting for? Like still Ukrainian installation. They were already set for two ships 22350 at the time of the Maidan.
        2. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 22 December 2016 16: 55
          +6
          Quote: Joker787
          Finally, wait!

          Have not yet waited.
          As for the frigates of project 22350, the engines from Ukraine came for two ships, and “while the third one will be formed, an engine will come in time for it, the development of which is being carried out by NPO Saturn,” the agency’s interlocutor is sure. According to him, the head frigate of the Admiral Gorshkov series will already go to sea in October to test, and the next, called Admiral Kasatonov, is also in a high degree of readiness.

          And our gas turbine engines will be tentatively in 2018:
          OJSC “Severnaya Verf” on June 16 posted information on the conclusion of an agreement with OJSC NPO Saturn for the manufacture and supply of two diesel-gas turbine units M55R for the frigate under construction of project 22350 head. No. 924 "Admiral Isakov."
          The cost of the ship’s set is 2,295 billion rubles. Delivery time is determined by July-August 2018.
          1. Joker787
            Joker787 22 December 2016 18: 44
            +1
            Bummer again, thanks for the info.
    3. Sagittarius2
      Sagittarius2 22 December 2016 16: 25
      +1
      we have some small admirals, all watchtowers, but corvetics.
    4. The comment was deleted.
    5. Titsen
      Titsen 22 December 2016 21: 40
      0
      Quote: Spartanez300
      The fleet is waiting for a new ship.


      Waiting for a very long time!
  2. Oml
    Oml 22 December 2016 15: 21
    +1
    Krasava. That's just faster in production and acceptance.
  3. Alexey RA
    Alexey RA 22 December 2016 15: 35
    +1
    The network has pictures of the Admiral of the Kasatonov fleet (project 22350) located in the outbuilding of the patrol ship of the far sea zone.

    Interestingly, someday we will have a single classification of ships? Poor 11356 and 22350 call either TFR or frigates. smile
    1. opus
      opus 22 December 2016 16: 01
      +4
      Quote: Alexey RA
      will we have a single classification of ships?

      Yet already stated

      article 4 of the Ship Regulations of the Navy (2001): "Ships and vessels of the Navy, depending on their main purpose and weapons, are divided into classes, and classes, based on specialization, displacement, type of power plant and principles of movement, into subclasses ...
      Guide to the Classification of Ships and Vessels of the Navy "


      TFR clearly (Patrol ships)
      Patrol ships of the 1135 project (code "Petrel", Krivak I, II, III)

      methods of architectural protection do not change anything
      1. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 22 December 2016 16: 59
        +1
        Quote: opus
        TFR clearly (Patrol ships)
        Patrol ships of the 1135 project (code "Petrel", Krivak I, II, III)

        Well, yes, on the mortgage boards "Grigorovich", "Essen", "Istomin" and "Butakov" they are named as patrol ships according to project 11356.

        But pr. 22350 - already frigates:
  4. etrofimov
    etrofimov 22 December 2016 15: 46
    +8
    Said Frigate so frigate! Stop Comrades Blending Terminology! If they fit into the NATO classification system. then we live in it .... And then how to sell oil. so in barrels, and how to build a naval base so begins: BOD, SKR, PSKR, BDK, BOD, PLARK, SSBN, TRPKSN, TCHK, ZPT, KHEZ .....
    1. Pulya
      Pulya 22 December 2016 15: 55
      +2
      Quote: etrofimov
      Said Frigate so frigate! Stop Comrades Blending Terminology! If they fit into the NATO classification system. then we live in it .... And then how to sell oil. so in barrels, and how to build a naval base so begins: BOD, SKR, PSKR, BDK, BOD, PLARK, SSBN, TRPKSN, TCHK, ZPT, KHEZ .....

      Count !!!
    2. Roman 11
      Roman 11 22 December 2016 16: 38
      0
      Quote: etrofimov
      and how to build naval base so

      Right. There have been frigates since the 17th century, even if they remain. Proper classification should be linked to displacement. The heaviest (partially armored) cruisers. But from them, as history shows, there is not much sense.

      In general, one should think about the defensive capabilities of modern ships .... they are worthless survivability, just such as corvettes, frigates and mrk.

      Any armored modules BIUS, EU, firing systems, bk cellar ..... in general, the most basic in the vital activity and combat effectiveness of the ship. Something can be considered like separate armored capsules for the crew, especially in places where there is no automation, where there are a lot of people.
    3. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 22 December 2016 17: 04
      +2
      Quote: etrofimov
      BOD, SKR, PSKR, BDK, BOD, SSBN, SSBN, TRPKSN, TCHK, ZPT, HEZ .....

      ТАВKR and TAРKP. smile
  5. etrofimov
    etrofimov 22 December 2016 15: 52
    +10
    Yes, and more .... Like the old Shipbuilder and Shiprepair, I sincerely amazed at the terms of construction of the wretched 3500 RBT for 5 years. Citizens, this is a national shame! Even wretched Indians do not allow themselves this.!
    Ready to congratulate everyone, the domestic shipbuilding industry has slipped to the levels of 1870 (in terms of time). The quality is probably worse ....
    Very sad:(
    1. vadim dok
      vadim dok 22 December 2016 16: 07
      +1
      I support! 8 years on a small tonnage guard! How much time will it take for a decent ship 10000tnvdi?
      1. etrofimov
        etrofimov 22 December 2016 16: 24
        +5
        FYI:
        1. LC Bismarck 51000BRT, 48 months from bookmark to commissioning, the lead in the series ..
        2.LK Yamato 63200 BRT, 50 months from bookmark to commissioning, the lead in the series ..
        3. The cruiser Ticonderoga 9800 BRT 35 months from bookmark to commissioning, the lead in the series ..
        4. KR Sverdlov 17000 BRT 30 months from bookmark to commissioning, the lead in the series ..
        This is so, for historical fitting ....
        All ships are leading in their series ... Countries of construction are different ....
        The present disgrace is obvious ....
        1. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 22 December 2016 17: 09
          +1
          Quote: etrofimov
          All ships are leading in their series ... Countries of construction are different ....

          He-he-he ... don't you want to remember the first large ship of the USSR? Leader of "Leningrad" project 1?
          Laid down on November 5, 1932.
          Launched on November 17, 1933.
          Delivered to the Navy on December 5, 1936.
          It was completed in July 1938 (yes, this is not a mistake - the ship accepted by the fleet for a year and a half stood at the construction wall of the plant).
          For almost 6 years, they built a large destroyer.
          1. etrofimov
            etrofimov 22 December 2016 23: 12
            0
            Well, yes, there were schools, however: Kirov, also the lead ship of the 7700BRT series, 35 months. Advantages and disadvantages of the project is a separate conversation, but the construction period speaks for something (30s, USSR !!!). Yes, the project is primarily Italian, and since 01 the same story ....
            1. Alexey RA
              Alexey RA 23 December 2016 11: 07
              0
              Quote: etrofimov
              Well, yes, there were jambs, however: Kirov, also the lead ship of the 7700BRT series, 35 months.

              So on "Kirov" it was the same: the ship was received by the fleet virtually unprepared.
              September 25, the commission signed an act on acceptance of the ship in the KBF. The next day, a naval flag was hoisted on a cruiser. In the act, the commission noted "a large number of unfinished work." In particular, the rate of fire of the main caliber guns turned out to be low, the armor protection of the torpedo tubes was not installed, the aircraft equipment and the MPUAZO system were not handed over, the paired device, the main turbine gearboxes, the fittings of the main and auxiliary steam pipelines of superheated and saturated steam were not replaced. The acceptance certificate was approved by the Deputy People's Commissar of the Navy, 1st rank flagship I.S. Isakov on October 16, 1938.
              By April 1939, most of these deficiencies and defects could not be eliminated, which disrupted the planned campaign of Kirov at the opening of the International New York Exhibition. Some work continued on the ship for a long time. By the beginning of the Soviet-Finnish war, the cruiser as a whole was ready and took part in the hostilities.

              That is, in fact, the ship was accepted by the fleet without an anti-aircraft fire control system (that is, without long-range air defense) ... who said "Polyment-Redut"? smile
        2. Roman 11
          Roman 11 22 December 2016 17: 16
          +3
          Quote: etrofimov
          1. LC Bismarck 51000BRT, 48 months from bookmark to commissioning, the lead in the series ..
          2.LK Yamato 63200 BRT, 50 months from bookmark to commissioning, the lead in the series ..

          But they had debugged production capacities, + order, units only managed to get off the slipways, each next type with insignificant design differences, and the armament was actually completely the same. Now there are slightly different realities, technologies faster. And we see such a nuance - the lack of specialization .. For example, we build corvettes in the Far East and the Baltic, moreover, there are shipyards where they work both on warships and civilians. This approach is erroneous, perhaps it’s traditions and a life buoy for the plant (in the absence of military orders, you can hedge with commercial projects or civilian needs), but the inefficiency from this immediately increases, there are large costs in time and resources.

          The individual opinion is as follows: It is necessary to clearly separate the military commissar from the citizen and the individual ones and assign classification to individual enterprises. Then the mechanism will work to its fullest. And that’s not all, it’s clear that the fleet is not rubber and sooner or later the opponent’s shipyards will face a situation when orders are exhausted, including export ones. Under such cases, every military plant must have a spare hatch - 10% of production IS ALWAYS they work for the civilian sector - yachts, pontoons, boats, boats, not necessarily connected with water .... if only for anything, but there should be a reserve for maneuver in troubled times.
          1. etrofimov
            etrofimov 22 December 2016 22: 53
            0
            :))) the technology is faster ..... According to the cut only if ...
          2. etrofimov
            etrofimov 22 December 2016 22: 57
            0
            YES! Especially with the Germans after trying to castrate Germany at Versailles!
        3. ride78
          ride78 22 December 2016 19: 14
          +1
          This is not to be written here) We have all the latest and least analogs))) And the deadlines are the deadlines. We will do it later and it will also have no analogs, they won’t catch up with us how it is heated))
      2. alexmach
        alexmach 22 December 2016 16: 47
        +1
        Perhaps the novelty of the project also plays a role. maybe not in a hurry due to the unavailability of the weapons complex? The head is still not surrendered to the fleet. With Polement-Redoubt, the situation is not clear. A long-range missile with AGSN is not ready.
        1. Roman 11
          Roman 11 22 December 2016 18: 07
          0
          Quote: alexmach
          Perhaps the novelty of the project also plays a role. maybe not in a hurry due to the unavailability of the weapons complex?

          We have it where it is empty and where it is thick.

          Polyment-Redoubt could be installed before on some TFR or BOD close in size ???? Already some experience would have been at the time of the descent. In general, the Bulava was installed in advance on the "Dmitry Donskoy" Shark. And here it was probably possible to test the new weapons ... or, as always, did you want to save yourself in admiral feeds for the study of sons and daughters in America ?? We need a unified approach - everything is new in trial operation on previous projects. Otherwise, the time factor, stagnation, delay, long-term construction, Unfinished ... sawed etc. by kids familiar pattern am

          Do we have Ivan Gren put in order ?? What BDK also requires new weapons? No. Or is it the norm to put ships into operation for a decade and a half? Who benefits from this?
        2. ride78
          ride78 22 December 2016 19: 15
          0
          What's super new there? And yes, they crap one's pants nobly.
          Well, on the winged ones ... to cram only 16 ... I can imagine what kind of electronics we have, that we are in such a tonnage of only 16 winged ones. 32 - no matter where it goes.
          1. Roman 11
            Roman 11 22 December 2016 19: 29
            0
            Quote: Ride78
            What's super new there?

            There is hardly anything new there. We are at war - all "meager" funds go to humanitarian aid, operations in Syria, the Syrian express and the like. For completion-completion - according to the leftover principle. So, new breakthroughs should not be expected now ..... in general, I think this is correct, overloading the economy by knocking out new allotments in conditions of uncertainty and the cost of hostilities can be expensive ... after all, who knows if it will grow a war on a scale with NATO? Or other provocations, such as the Baltics, or something like that.
            1. alexmach
              alexmach 22 December 2016 23: 04
              0
              Quote: Novel 11
              We are at war - all "meager" funds go to humanitarian aid, operations in Syria, the Syrian express and the like. For completion-completion - according to the residual principle

              Do not say nonsense, funds in the budget for the defense order are one of not many protected articles.
          2. alexmach
            alexmach 22 December 2016 23: 03
            0
            Well .. in fact, almost the entire range of weapons of the 22350s is new. At first the gun mount didn’t work there, then there was a problem with the redoubt. The package and UKKS are already run in small boats. In his shell, he seems to be updated. In addition, if my memory serves me, they burned one set of engines on the head ... This project was hard given, maybe because they didn’t drive it until the head one was finished ...
    2. Galleon
      Galleon 23 December 2016 10: 32
      +3
      And where did you have to work, in which plant?
      1. etrofimov
        etrofimov 23 December 2016 18: 50
        0
        KMOLZ 2002-2008, LAO 2008 - HB
    3. Fornit
      Fornit 23 December 2016 16: 12
      +1
      And what is "BRT" ?? Such an abbreviation is unknown to military shipbuilding ... As an old shipbuilder, you must take this into account ...
      1. etrofimov
        etrofimov 23 December 2016 18: 49
        0
        I agree, the term is not from the set of the Navy. We read "Full displacement"
    4. saturn.mmm
      saturn.mmm 23 December 2016 16: 18
      0
      Quote: etrofimov
      Like the old Ship and Shiprepair, I sincerely amazed at the construction time of the wretched 3500 RBT for 5 years.

      As an old ship you must know the reasons for the long construction time.
      Then Yuri Vladimirovich somehow uploaded the video, I repeat.
  6. gladysheff2010
    gladysheff2010 22 December 2016 22: 20
    0
    Not a bad "splinter" for American claims to dominance in the world water area.
    1. etrofimov
      etrofimov 22 December 2016 23: 00
      +1
      Sorry for the replay:
      Ready to congratulate everyone, the domestic shipbuilding industry has slipped to the levels of 1870 (in terms of time). The quality is probably worse ....
      Very sad:(
  7. Every
    Every 23 December 2016 10: 13
    0
    The construction timeline is really depressing.
    Laid down in 2009, withdrawn from boathouse in 2014. What did he do there so much time? Then, Ukraine has not yet gotten into trouble, so the link to the lack of EU is irrelevant.
    No weapons complex? So after all, when the contracts for the development and delivery of this notorious "Polyment" were concluded, the terms were stipulated.
    Who was responsible for the failure to meet deadlines?
    They would put a couple of "responsible" persons, and not scapegoats, you look and start moving with the construction.
  8. Fornit
    Fornit 23 December 2016 16: 14
    +2
    Quote: etrofimov
    Like the old Ship and Repairman, I am sincerely moved by the terms of the construction of the wretched 3500 RBT for 5 years


    And what is "BRT" ?? Such an abbreviation is unknown to military shipbuilding ... As an old shipbuilder, you must take this into account ...
    1. etrofimov
      etrofimov 23 December 2016 18: 51
      0
      I agree, the term is not from the set of the Navy. We read "Full displacement"