Military Review

Russian Navy will order 4 modified rescue vessel

10
Russian designers will improve the 21300С vessels and build one such vessel for each fleet, News. The fleet is counting on the 4 ship of this project, although the total need for them is six units.




According to the newspaper, referring to the Russian Navy General Headquarters, “an order for rescue ships is expected to be included in the new state armaments program for the 2018-2027 years”. It is planned that the construction of ships will unfold at the Admiralty Shipyards in St. Petersburg, where in the 2012 year the lead ship of the series, Igor Belousov, was launched.

According to the information, the Navy has already agreed on the basic requirements and now the St. Petersburg Almaz Design Bureau is finalizing the draft of the improved rescue vessels. They will be larger than “Igor Belousov”: the length of the hull will increase by 3,2 m - to 110 m, the displacement will increase by 150 – 200 t.

According to military expert Dmitry Boltenkov, after the death of the Kursk, the state pays special attention to the development of the rescue service of the Navy.

A draft of the rescue ship "Igor Belousov" was developed, capable of using a variety of equipment from its side: rescue vehicles, uninhabited underwater vehicles and so on. This ship carries a deep-sea diving complex, which allows it to work at depths up to 450 m. Such GVK are single and unique,
said Boltenkov.

He noted that “over the two years of operation of the“ Igor Belousov ”, the sailors made certain conclusions and it is absolutely normal if the new ships of this series are modified for greater ease of operation.”
Photos used:
TASS / Yuri Smithyuk
10 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Primoos
    Primoos 27 November 2017 11: 54 New
    +2
    Yes, the feeling of complete helplessness during the tragedy with Kursk is terrible. Such ships are needed in the fleet. This gives the sailors a CHANCE for salvation. It's great. But it would be better if they never came in handy.
    1. Going
      Going 27 November 2017 12: 26 New
      11
      At that time, everything lay on our side and the army and the entire economy.
      1. shans2
        shans2 27 November 2017 14: 52 New
        +3
        The tragedy with the South Korean ferry Sevol showed that even the rich and advanced countries are few that can oppose such tragedies. There were no specialized courts either, and this is 2014 ...
        1. Going
          Going 27 November 2017 15: 02 New
          +7
          It would be better, of course, on someone else's experience, and it costs too much.
  2. Stirbjorn
    Stirbjorn 27 November 2017 12: 00 New
    +2
    The good news is that such large projects need to be launched in a series.
  3. Sergey53
    Sergey53 27 November 2017 12: 12 New
    +1
    They should be there for a long time. With us, this is not always in the first place.
  4. oldzek
    oldzek 27 November 2017 19: 00 New
    +1
    in general, everything is true, but I want to drink so that they are never used for their intended purpose, but only at the teachings of IMHO
  5. water
    water 27 November 2017 21: 30 New
    +5
    QUOTE: "According to military expert Dmitry Boltenkov, after the death of the Kursk, the state pays special attention to the development of the emergency and rescue service of the Navy." “Do these experts surprise me all over !?” Well, there is no emergency rescue service in the Navy, not even a search and rescue service. There is their shadow, almost a ghost - little suitable, fragmented Directorates of search and emergency rescue operations in the fleets.
    17 years have passed since Kursk. The fleet received 1 (one) Submarine Rescue. And you need 2 for each fleet. You need a training vessel with a deep-sea diving complex of saturated dives. We need a training complex for training to maintain qualifications.
    As for I. Belousov, let's resort to a simple situational modeling and see - what and how can he? Let's start with the little things - you need to raise the MI-8 helicopter that has fallen into the water from a depth, say 200 meters. It seems like everything is simple: they came to the area, found, lowered .... and what lowered? - "Panther +", so it will not lead the cable to the rotor of the screw without special devices. And we don’t have special devices - we ourselves had to come up with them, but we were somehow shy. So we lower the diver. Diver started the cable, secured. Now you need to raise. With what? We have crane installations at 10 tons. And the weight of the 12 helicopter !? So it turns out that if you don’t break anything, you will have to wait for the killer ship.
    Well, is it really impossible to put one instead of two crane installations, but on 50 tons !? After all, the stability of the ship allows it.
    Let's go further - suppose that the 636.1 project submarine due to a fire has been de-energized and floats in the surface position by the will of the wind and waves, not having its course. "I. Belousov" rushed to her aid. All that was filed, the fire was extinguished, you need to tow the boat to the base in tow. But as? - Pull the emergency tow rope out of the hold and bring it to the boat? And how then to regulate its length? Then we will break the power cable to the submarines. Confusion is the same! - Well, what a lifeguard without a towing winch !? Is he supposed to go to an accident paired with a towing vessel?
    Well, the “Bester” on this Rescuer is nothing more than an exclusively expensive project, entailing a decrease in functional qualities. Is it really so hard for these experts born to understand a simple thing: a self-propelled deep-sea vehicle (SGA) is needed where the vessel is not able to independently hold a "spot" above the object and an additional search of the object is needed. If the vessel holds a “spot” above the object, an additional search is not needed, the SGA is not needed. We need a rescue bell (McCain's bell) and an uninhabited PA, or a diver to get a guide cable (if it did not come out with the ASB).
    This project should not be modified, but processed. In the form in which it is, it is certainly functional, but in some matters it is inferior to the 527 project (ESPRON 1959 built in the year). The Chinese are already giggling at us, and if we continue to rivet them, they will laugh!
    1. Don
      Don 27 November 2017 22: 29 New
      +2
      Totally agree with you. I also wrote a lot about problems with saving submariners, but mostly patriotic patriots sit on this resource. Here is a link to a readable article about problems in this issue http://flot.com/2017/%D0%92%D0%BC%D1%8426/
  6. Bert
    Bert 28 November 2017 05: 53 New
    0
    Quote: Donskoy
    After all

    Well here is the real information. And what is planned there for 2027 is so noodles. Whether it will be or not. Already a lot of things were voiced, but things are still there. Unfortunately. All the tales.