Military Review

Corvettes project 20380 arm "Caliber" and "armor"

88
The small patrol ships of the 20380 project will receive the Caliber long-range cruise missiles and the Pantsir-M anti-aircraft missile and artillery systems (SPEC), according to News.




As the newspaper was told in the Main Command of the Navy, the principal decision on the re-equipment of the 20380 project corvettes has already been taken, the project is now being negotiated.

“The 20380 project corvettes are multipurpose warships in the near-sea zone. Their construction has been going on since 2001. The ships are made using stealth technology. Their hulls and superstructures have characteristic angular forms, the construction uses slow-burning fiberglass with radio absorption properties, the publication reminds.

Currently, these ships are armed with the universal X-35U missiles, as well as the Polimet-Redut anti-aircraft complex.

Corvette project 20380 is clearly not enough weapons. In fact, they were anti-submarine ships with limited ability to hit land and sea targets. On the first serial ships did not even have a normal air defense. Instead of “Polyment-Reduta” stood the DARK “Dirk-M”. But after modernization, the stealth corvette will turn into universal platforms. They will be able to sink ships and ships, with high accuracy knock out ground targets. And the combination of "Polyment-Reduta" and "Shell" will allow you to create an impenetrable air defense zone in a radius of 100 km around the corvette,
told the newspaper military historian Dmitry Boltenkov.

At present, the Russian Navy includes 5 ships of Project 20380. The Stereguschiy, the Soobrazitelny, the Boyky and the Resistant are part of the Baltic Fleet. "Perfect" - in the Pacific fleet. Under construction - another 8 corvettes.
Photos used:
http://army-news.ru
88 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Alexey-74
    Alexey-74 26 December 2017 10: 09 New
    +8
    This is absolutely the right decision. The Corvettes will have disproportionately more opportunities. They will become real strike ships, and even with very powerful air defense / missile defense.
    1. Burbon
      Burbon 26 December 2017 11: 19 New
      +4
      Quote: Alexey-74
      This is absolutely the right decision.

      belay laughing what faith is it ???? ..... from a corvette they want to make a death star ?? wassat ... well, paper is not metal .... it will endure ..... this is nonsense ... especially since there are no Polent-Reduta on corvettes ..... well, no ... author -> author -> the author is burning! .... there is only a redoubt ... tongue
      1. Buffet
        Buffet 26 December 2017 12: 03 New
        +2
        Where's the chase for the chimeras here? Should the ship not have its normal air defense and strike weapons?
        1. Burbon
          Burbon 26 December 2017 12: 17 New
          +1
          Quote: SHVEDsky_stol
          Where's the chase for the chimeras here?

          fool fool - displacement - armament - cost !!!!! fool
          1. Buffet
            Buffet 26 December 2017 22: 21 New
            +1
            and what is wrong with them?
            1. Alex777
              Alex777 27 December 2017 12: 44 New
              +2
              Read how much they cost 20280 (which are without air defense) and 11356 for example.
              22350 (even though it is also without air defense) is a bit more expensive ...
              Re-equipment will make the cost of 2000 tons of the boat more than 11356. Although at least something may work. Air defense with a radius of 100 km - nonsense. There is none and will not be for many reasons.
              1. Dart2027
                Dart2027 27 December 2017 20: 48 New
                0
                Quote: Alex777
                Re-equipment will make the cost of a 2000t boat more than 11356

                Firstly, none of us has seen the cost estimate, and secondly, if at the same time it becomes more powerful than 11356, then this is another matter.
                1. alexmach
                  alexmach 27 December 2017 20: 59 New
                  +1
                  So it will not be the same.
                  Its main disadvantages are compared with the same 11356 in its size, and less seaworthiness floating out of it. And also, as a forum member named Rudolph said, the possibility of using weapons with less commonplace unrest.
                  1. Dart2027
                    Dart2027 27 December 2017 22: 24 New
                    0
                    Well, since it is intended for BMZ, such seaworthiness as that of DMZ ships is not required from it. In addition, the cost consists not only of weapons, but also of everything that is installed on it, and as I wrote the estimate, none of us has seen, and just replacing flexible inserts with more advanced ones can result in such a penny that my mother does not worry.
                    1. alexmach
                      alexmach 28 December 2017 00: 15 New
                      +1
                      If he is exclusively for BMZ, why should he strike on land?

                      I didn’t see the estimate, but the purchase prices for each of the ships are known. for both 20385 and 20380.

                      Well, I already wrote, I think in any case in a couple of years we will see what happens in fact.
        2. alexmach
          alexmach 26 December 2017 13: 46 New
          +1
          The question does not make sense without determining what "normal air defense" means.
      2. AlexKP
        AlexKP 27 December 2017 14: 32 New
        +1
        But do not tell how Polement / Redoubt differs from Redoubt?
        1. alexmach
          alexmach 28 December 2017 00: 16 New
          +2
          lack of Pole? Radar if simple.
    2. alexmach
      alexmach 26 December 2017 13: 35 New
      +6
      This is not the right decision, it's just bullshit. There is already an extremely dense line-up, where else is Callibra with shells stuffed then? Instead of what? And the increase in displacement will not pull the propulsion system. Is it possible to talk about 20386, but this is almost a different ship with a displacement of the frigate.

      Project 20380 corvettes obviously lacked weapons

      The expert raves. These corvettes are more likely to have excess weapons when they are displaced. The only thing he might miss is an anti-submarine missile. Everything else - just God forbid that would work as stated.

      Currently, these ships are armed with the universal X-35U missiles, as well as the Polimet-Redut anti-aircraft complex.

      There is no redoubt polymer there, there are Redut launchers with a radar ... from the same Furke shell.

      And the combination of Poliment-Reduta and the Shell will make it possible to create an impenetrable air defense zone in a radius of 100 km around the corvette

      Will not allow it. Its radars will not allow in principle to direct missiles at such a range. And install another radar without increasing displacement in any way.
      1. Buffet
        Buffet 26 December 2017 22: 22 New
        -1
        Couch Expert, Major. Oh well))))
        1. alexmach
          alexmach 26 December 2017 22: 33 New
          +3
          Does the couch expert at the captain have any objections?
          1. Buffet
            Buffet 26 December 2017 22: 36 New
            +1
            You can get clear answers, where does the data about the reasoning about the weakness of the propulsion system come from? From other "experts" who are clearly not raving ??? Why an excess of weapons? on the basis of what such conclusions are made? Polement-Redoubt ... that is, they themselves saw what it costs, how it works, and which TTX does it have, right?
            1. alexmach
              alexmach 26 December 2017 23: 16 New
              +2
              Data exclusively from open sources. If you had studied the question even superficially, before you curry, you would have come to the same conclusions.
              1. Buffet
                Buffet 27 December 2017 19: 39 New
                0
                That is, some kind of couch expert who didn’t even see this ship, nor his drawings, or maybe the sea in general, can talk about which ships to be? And you took it at face value, right? That you will go far ... on the fence, too, a lot of what is written in chalk. But, for the most part, I’m sure that you are a ship design engineer who works in some design bureau and develops ships, and you’ll fix it right, right?)))
                1. alexmach
                  alexmach 27 December 2017 20: 38 New
                  +2
                  Stop joking.
                  1. Buffet
                    Buffet 27 December 2017 22: 13 New
                    0
                    And what am I wrong? And then we have heroes clever people only in the comments, and few people are eager to work as designers and developers.
                    1. alexmach
                      alexmach 28 December 2017 18: 36 New
                      +2
                      You are wrong, the collision is off topic.
            2. alexmach
              alexmach 26 December 2017 23: 44 New
              +1
              You can get clear answers, where does the data about the reasoning about the weakness of the propulsion system come from?

              Look at their top and cruising speeds. And on the sailing range. Compare with analogues. Oh yes, he has no analogues in the world. Then compare
              Then look at the ships 20385 into which the UKKS shoved and ... could not buy German diesels for them. Their speed has still fallen compared to 20380.
              About the range ... well, it seems to be completely dependent on the fuel reserves on board. fuel supplies did not fit into this ship. Both for the ship itself and for the helicopter based on it.
              Why an excess of weapons?

              Because nothing but weapons entered its displacement. Because none of the ships of this class have such universality. And at the same time, wherever you look, something is missing everywhere. The SAM does not have radar, there are excellent means of searching for submarines, but there is no means of destroying them at long range. There is an anti-submarine helicopter - there is no fuel (2 full refueling), and accordingly there is no possibility of long-term work on finding submarines. Well, again, look at its analogues.

              Polement-Redoubt ... that is, they themselves saw what it costs, how it works, and which TTX does it have, right?

              About what kind of sight there is, and what is included in it, it is written in black and white even on the same Wikipedia. Ahead of your indignation over the unreliability of the resource - provide a more reliable source.

              Now back to my question that you did not answer
              Does the couch expert at the captain have any objections?

              That is, in fact, there are no objections to the arguments? Some questions and nit-picking on the forums?
              1. alexmach
                alexmach 26 December 2017 23: 45 New
                +2
                Oh yes, he has no analogues in the world. Then compare

                ... with other ships of the same displacement and similar functions.
              2. Buffet
                Buffet 27 December 2017 19: 43 New
                0
                Well, dear, if you know everything straight about this ship, then go! Go and show these shipbuilding engineers who studied 5 for this for years and these ships design for 30 years how to build ships. And about the nit-picking, it’s very funny to read such comments by omniscient experts, who wow.
                1. alexmach
                  alexmach 27 December 2017 20: 50 New
                  +1
                  I mean, show them how to? So they already build almost “as it should”, and not how some semi-literate in the article above fantasized. With calibers and shells! Everywhere, on every little love.

                  Actually, I am writing to you about the real characteristics and limitations of these ships, known from open sources (closed sources, who would discuss something with you on the forum?) Not to humiliate shipbuilders there, but to justify that the article is written bullshit. If you are unable to adhere to elementary norms of communication, or to conduct reasoned discussion, go write under someone else's posts. We have been talking with you for 2 days and during this time I have not heard from you a single constructive proposal or argument, only thoughts about
                  - my rank on the forum
                  - advice on what I need to do
                  - Other empty empty rubbish to nobody.

                  No more answering my comments if you have nothing to say. Follow the topic of 5 year old - this is the time that will judge us. If at least one 20380 appears (except for the already laid down 20385) equipped with calibers, you are right, if not, then I was right.
                  1. Buffet
                    Buffet 27 December 2017 22: 18 New
                    0
                    I heard from a person who has never been a shipwrecker, but can talk about what is nonsense, and what isn’t nonsense in shipbuilding ... My construct is that if you were all such an expert expert, you would go to an enterprise where they developed this ship, and this project was redone, that’s all ... I’m saying that the critics divorced above the roof, but it’s hard to go there by yourself.
                    1. alexmach
                      alexmach 28 December 2017 00: 24 New
                      +2
                      Yes, I would be happy, but only in this article is the enterprise offering Callibra with Shell on 20380, because it is not indicated. And there are no links to information sources. And "Iksperd" a certain anonymous spoke out in the article. Can the author outgrow? Oh damn, so the article is not signed by anyone. Nonsense to sign something shy.

                      Article rubbish written well, just that would be. Urikalki - screaming about her "how cool" empty people.

                      Yes, I can still distinguish nonsense from nonsense, but I advise you, to begin to learn to read and analyze information, and only then give advice to whom and what to do.
                      1. Buffet
                        Buffet 28 December 2017 22: 23 New
                        0
                        Here it is, excuse ahahah. I was directly expecting this answer that "The enterprise is not indicated," I found all the information in just a minute. Who is the developer, who is the Civil Code, and all of everything is all ... And you continue to speak out here that it is necessary to redo it, you are not capable of more, but only to fight and build something from yourself in the comments.
      2. AlexKP
        AlexKP 27 December 2017 14: 50 New
        0
        UKKS 1x8 Caliber instead of 8 Uranus. The meaning of the replacement is the universalization of weapons for striking both at sea targets and along the coast + range is higher. And anti-submarine defense is built on the NK Package which he has in stock.
        1. alexmach
          alexmach 27 December 2017 15: 22 New
          +1
          UKKS 1x8 Caliber instead of 8 Uranus. The meaning of the replacement is the universalization of weapons for striking both at sea targets and along the coast + range higher

          And what will it “cost” in terms of displacement? Does this ship have a displacement reserve? And how will an increase in displacement affect draft and driving performance?

          UKKS is certainly attractive for its versatility, and apart from everything else, a torpedo rocket from a complex of caliber would have climbed there. But on the other hand, not every ship needs a supersonic missile such as Callibre. I would, from my softer look, on the contrary, on ships armed with calibers, also add uranium somewhere to shoot at kids.

          And anti-submarine defense is built on the NK Package which he has in stock.

          Yeah, the range of torpedoes which is 2 times less than the range of torpedoes of a potential partner. And what to do if a submarine is detected by a helicopter at a longer range? Will the ship go there or return to the helicopter for a torpedo?
          1. AlexKP
            AlexKP 27 December 2017 16: 11 New
            0

            [/ quote] And what will it be "worth" in terms of displacement? Does this ship have a displacement reserve? And how will an increase in displacement affect draft and driving performance?

            neither you nor I know this, but the corvette of project 20385 will be completed next year
            And what to do if a submarine is detected by a helicopter at a longer range? Will the ship go there or return to the helicopter for the torpedo? [Quote]

            for this, the helicopter has a standard armament which doubles the detection range in terms of damage.
            1. alexmach
              alexmach 27 December 2017 17: 46 New
              +1
              Does it cover 8 km of the distance of an aviation torpedo in two detection ranges? The very torpedo which itself still needs to be found?

              Well, the more weapons the helicopter takes on board, the less it will take the means of detection - sonar buoys. With a suspended ASG, you can certainly further investigate a previously discovered target, and conduct systematic anti-submarine work on a large area and as part of a group of forces?

              neither you nor I know this, but the corvette of project 20385 will be completed next year

              Yes. indeed, they will build and see everything. But there is one more point about which Burbon writes above. It is clear that the bulk of the cost of a modern ship is equipment and weapons. 20385 rumored in value almost caught up with 11356 watchmen, with noticeably worse seaworthiness. Note the series was limited to only two ships already laid. So maybe if arming a ship almost like a destroyer makes sense and build it in appropriate dimensions?
          2. KaPToC
            KaPToC 27 December 2017 21: 01 New
            +1
            Quote: alexmach
            But on the other hand, not every ship needs a supersonic missile such as Callibre.

            Gauges are just a budget rocket, supersonic and expensive - onyx.
        2. KaPToC
          KaPToC 27 December 2017 21: 01 New
          +1
          Quote: AlexKP
          UKKS 1x8 Caliber instead of 8 Uranus.

          Uranium just stands on deck, there is no room for calibers.
      3. Dart2027
        Dart2027 27 December 2017 20: 52 New
        0
        Quote: alexmach
        Instead of what?

        Gauges instead of Uranus, they are certainly larger, but nothing incredible. The shell can replace AK-shki, it is not so big.
        Quote: alexmach
        Its radars will not allow in principle to direct missiles at such a range

        But this is most likely true, although the radars are also being improved, they may already know how to upgrade them.
        Quote: AlexKP
        I would, from my couch’s eyes, look at ships armed with calibers also, and add uranium somewhere to shoot at kids.

        On the small fry you can work out a missile defense, as in 2008, or a cannon. To put both of them is really bust.
        1. alexmach
          alexmach 27 December 2017 21: 14 New
          +1
          Gauges instead of Uranus, they are certainly larger, but nothing incredible.

          Well, how can you tell UKSK to lead 8 tons into 14 cells, there are 16 tons of rockets in it, and even more, depending on what to charge, and there are at least 30 tons of it in running order. 1,6% of the mass of an already tightly packed ship.

          The shell can replace AK-shki, it is not so big.

          The carapace is several times heavier than the AK, although I just found out with surprise for myself that he was unified with it according to the pursuit of the tower and initially planned to install these complexes ("chestnuts") instead of AK-shek .... but not everywhere they could for the mass.
          1. Dart2027
            Dart2027 27 December 2017 22: 39 New
            0
            Quote: alexmach
            1,6% of the mass of an already tightly packed ship

            Not really. From this we must subtract the mass of Uranus, the rockets of which are also not light (approximately 600-670 kg), plus the installation itself. I would not have counted an advantage of 15 tons. But the main thing is that you need to make your own rocket under it, the problem of unification was a sore spot of the USSR Navy. Why do the Berks serve and serve, but we don’t know what to do with the Sarychs and the BOD? You can replace the engines, you can replace the radars, but how to replace weapons? Or design a rocket for each launcher? Dead end. As a result, you have to somehow change the entire fleet of ships of the 1st rank, before they reach their term of service. In general, if placing a Redut on a corvette is a moot point, here PU for missiles should be standard on all ships.
            1. alexmach
              alexmach 28 December 2017 00: 44 New
              +1
              I would have expected not an advantage of 15 tons

              Somehow not enough. 8 missiles - about 5 tons, well, let the installation weigh the same. We have a minimum of 20 tons of difference, not to mention the dimensions .. yes 1% not 1,6%
              but we don’t know what to do with the Sarychs and the BOD?

              After all, there was a draft inclined launcher for Onyxes.

              Why don't we actually know that? Apparently, nothing has happened to Sarycham. With the BOD - just the Uranians were going to add.

              In general, if placing Redut on a corvette is a moot point

              I didn’t understand here, but why is it debatable? It seems to have been a long-resolved issue. Here is the way for you the same unification on PU but only for anti-aircraft missiles.

              here PU for missiles should be standard on all ships.

              Well, it seems that we are going to that. But only where possible.
              1. Dart2027
                Dart2027 28 December 2017 17: 07 New
                0
                Quote: alexmach
                If he is exclusively for BMZ, why should he strike on land?
                And you count how many cities he can get with his missiles, without going particularly far from his bases. In general, the tendency of recent years shows that the ability to hit on land is as important as the ability to hit ships.
                Quote: alexmach
                but the purchase prices for each ship are known
                I don’t argue with this, it’s about what exactly is invested in this cost.
                Quote: alexmach
                Somehow not enough.
                Maybe I did not find the exact weight of Uranus itself, but in any case it weighs more than one ton.
                Quote: alexmach
                After all, there was a draft inclined launcher for Onyxes.
                Believe me, the project and the finished product are heaven and earth. That is, of course it happens that everything goes without a hitch, without a hitch, but very rarely, but I don’t remember something finished product.
                Quote: alexmach
                Why don't we actually know that?
                The fact of the matter is that we generally have the opportunity to replace dead boilers, the boiler building works for itself, but the benefits are not very good - spend a ton of money and get a 1st rank misunderstanding with 8 obsolete missiles and air defense near zone?
                Quote: alexmach
                I didn’t understand here, but why is it debatable? It seems to have been a long-resolved issue.
                I mean the very fact of long-range air defense on a corvette class ship.
                Quote: alexmach
                Well, it seems that we are going to that. But only where possible.
                Well, given the fact that they are successfully put on the RTOs, I believe that over time the entire fleet will be unified.
                1. alexmach
                  alexmach 28 December 2017 18: 53 New
                  +1
                  Maybe I did not find the exact weight of Uranus itself, but in any case it weighs more than one ton.

                  610 kilograms for a rocket. Launchers - figured strictly by eye.
                  Believe me, the project and the finished product are heaven and earth. That is, of course it happens that everything goes without a hitch, without a hitch, but very rarely, but I don’t remember something finished product.

                  RTO "Roll".
                  I mean the very fact of long-range air defense on a corvette class ship.

                  So, after all, there is no long-range air defense there because of the lack of radar, and as I understand it, there is no possibility of a tudd to establish such a radar ... because of the same displacement. And Redoubt - it’s universal, It can also shoot short-range self-defense missiles.
                  Well, given the fact that they are successfully put on the RTOs, I believe that over time the entire fleet will be unified.

                  Well, let's see, it is interesting if this happens.

                  In my opinion, they are put on RTOs because there is simply nowhere else to put them, but it was necessary to deploy them somewhere. In addition, RTOs do not put much of what costs 20380 (air defense + anti-aircraft defense), but it is also necessary.

                  In addition, it seems to me that the X-35 is too early to write off - a light missile is also needed, and shoving UKKS with Caliber everywhere is too much. Someone above said that Callibre is a low-cost rocket compared to Onyx, but this is only compared to Onyx, but compared to the X-35 it’s expensive and overall, the longest is more than 8 meters in length.

                  In addition, the Uranians decided to arm the Gadgets and Lightning. That is, the missile in service still remains. There was a project to equip her and other ships.
                  1. Dart2027
                    Dart2027 28 December 2017 20: 03 New
                    0
                    Quote: alexmach
                    MRK "Nakat"
                    I meant the inclined UKKS, and not the PU intended only for Onyx.
                    Quote: alexmach
                    So after all, there is no long-range air defense there because of the lack of radar
                    This is what I mean. I don’t know how the issues with target designation are solved there, but if you use only short-range missiles, then the hefty PU Reduta is really superfluous, the original Dirk was enough, with a replacement for the Shell.
                    Quote: alexmach
                    In addition, RTOs do not put much on what costs 20380 (air defense + anti-aircraft defense)
                    Well, it will not fit physically there, although the air defense of the BZ is there.
                    Quote: alexmach
                    a light rocket is also needed, and shove everywhere UKKS with Gauges
                    Then you need to develop a TK that will allow you to shoot from the UKKS, since it is better to come up with the ability to use standard PU than to suffer later as in the USSR.
                    Quote: alexmach
                    In addition, the Uranians decided to arm the Gadgets and Lightning
                    But this is logical - since there are so many problems with the construction of new ones, you need to squeeze the maximum out of the remaining. Actually, this had to be done a long time ago, but everyone was waiting for new developments. But this is a modernization of the old groundwork, but the new should be as unified as possible.
                    1. alexmach
                      alexmach 28 December 2017 22: 37 New
                      +2
                      This is what I mean. I don’t know how the issues with target designation are solved there, but if you use only short-range missiles, then the hefty PU Reduta is really superfluous, the original Dirk was enough, with a replacement for the Shell.

                      It seems that they were talking about short- and medium-range missiles. The contradictory information that came out of this.
                      Then you need to develop a TK that will allow you to shoot from the UKKS, since it is better to come up with the ability to use standard PU than to suffer later as in the USSR.

                      Perhaps for ships with USC this is the best solution.
  2. Magic archer
    Magic archer 26 December 2017 10: 09 New
    +2
    Small and daring! Very powerful armament for the corvette! Praatically mini destroyer! The only thing that confuses is the protracted tests of Polement.
  3. Ankipelgygyrgyn
    Ankipelgygyrgyn 26 December 2017 10: 11 New
    +1
    For such ships, weapons were clearly weak, but now the norm.
    1. Burbon
      Burbon 26 December 2017 12: 18 New
      +1
      Quote: Ankypelgygyrgyn
      For such ships, weapons were clearly weak, but now the norm.

      fool he was initially too rearmament .... this implied its huge cost - it’s easier to build watchdogs than these corvettes ((
  4. Going
    Going 26 December 2017 10: 13 New
    +6
    Project 20380 small patrol ships will receive the Caliber long-range cruise missiles and the Pantsir-M anti-aircraft missile and artillery systems (ZRAK),


    Now let our "partners" scratch their turnips.
    1. novel66
      novel66 26 December 2017 10: 20 New
      10
      why should they scratch something - they have destroyers like dirt, and we are patrolling by the watchdogs crying
      1. Going
        Going 26 December 2017 10: 22 New
        +4
        Yes it is, but I am in this case about quality.
        1. Viktor.12.71
          Viktor.12.71 26 December 2017 10: 51 New
          0
          Gauges for surface targets work at distances up to 500km. I do not see any reason to compare USS Freedom electronics with 20380, and so everything is obvious.
      2. Serg65
        Serg65 26 December 2017 11: 24 New
        +6
        Healthy whiner hi
        Quote: novel xnumx
        they have destroyers like mud

        bully Roma, have you heard anything about the brig Mercury?
        Quote: novel xnumx
        why scratch something

        laughing Read at your leisure about Deputy Commander of the Black Sea Fleet Admiral Orlov and his sea adventures. Well, let's say this is https://books.google.kg/books?isbn=5457162834
        1. novel66
          novel66 26 December 2017 12: 07 New
          +2
          healthy! hi in this case, I'm not a whiner, but an envious Mercury? not a flying dutchman for an hour?
          1. Serg65
            Serg65 26 December 2017 12: 28 New
            +5
            laughing Oh you. Flying Dutchman!!!!!!
            This brig under the command of the captain of Lieutenant Kazarsky, having on board the 18 guns, laced two Turkish battleships (110-gun Selimiy and 74-gun Real Bay)

            And this is a monument to Kazarsky in Sevastopol!
            At the behest of the Imperial Majesty, in the Russian Navy, paying tribute to this victory, the name "Memory of Mercury" appeared and the USSR Navy also had a hydrograph "Memory of Mercury" wink
            1. novel66
              novel66 26 December 2017 12: 35 New
              +2
              Yes, I’ve already read it aloud to my colleagues, I’ve got it, felt it, crying the messenger was sent! drinks
        2. novel66
          novel66 26 December 2017 12: 11 New
          +2
          I will report the book on reading soldier although I prefer the fiction in the style of "protracted shot" Azolsky
    2. Jedi
      Jedi 26 December 2017 10: 22 New
      +5
      Hi victor hi Improving the air defense umbrella and the range of defeat will make you scratch your turnip, it’s up to you to bring the plan into action.
      1. Going
        Going 26 December 2017 10: 24 New
        +5
        Good morning Maxim! hi , Yes, very slowly and with a big creak, but still moving.
        1. Jedi
          Jedi 26 December 2017 10: 27 New
          +5
          Quote: Going
          very slowly and with a big creak, but still moving.

          Better than stomping around in vain.
          1. Going
            Going 26 December 2017 10: 29 New
            +6
            It was still okay to stomp around, but when we rolled into the abyss it was "fun."
            1. Jedi
              Jedi 26 December 2017 10: 32 New
              +5
              Don't remind me better. I still can’t forget the shots of sawing machinery for scrap metal to the joyful speeches of the announcers about friendship with the United States. negative
              1. Going
                Going 26 December 2017 10: 34 New
                +5
                “We were friends” that they nearly torn us into small parts, it’s good that they temporarily dozed off and thought that the matter had been done, it was not worth rushing anymore.
                1. Jedi
                  Jedi 26 December 2017 10: 42 New
                  +4
                  I really hope that the lesson has gone for the future and there will no longer be such errors.
                  1. Serg65
                    Serg65 26 December 2017 11: 27 New
                    +5
                    hi Max welcome!
                    Quote: Jedi
                    I really hope that the lesson has gone for the future and there will no longer be such errors.

                    I also really want to hope, but only recently the familiar trends have appeared again ... people want change again recourse
                    1. Jedi
                      Jedi 26 December 2017 11: 31 New
                      +4
                      Sergey, hello! hi
                      Quote: Serg65
                      only recently familiar trends have appeared again ... people want change again

                      I know, therefore, and I hope that we will not engage in the national sport of dill - trampling a rake.
    3. Alex_59
      Alex_59 26 December 2017 10: 23 New
      +2
      Quote: Going
      Now let our "partners" scratch their turnips.

      They will scratch, scratch.
      ".... uh ... and this is the Russian fleet? ..." (scratches turnip)
      1. Going
        Going 26 December 2017 10: 28 New
        +5
        I understand you, but what happened 10 - 15 years ago? , we even had nothing to scratch.
        1. Alex_59
          Alex_59 26 December 2017 10: 56 New
          +3
          Quote: Going
          I understand you, but what was 10 - 15 a year ago?

          It is not necessary to equal the swamps, but to the tops of the mountains. Let's remember what happened 30 years ago.
          1. Serg65
            Serg65 26 December 2017 11: 31 New
            +3
            Quote: Alex_59
            Let's remember what happened 30 years ago.

            laughing In 87 I got the 3 star on the shoulder strap wink
            Despite the Gorbachev laws noted healthy!
            Well, if Aleksey, seriously, then in the 87-m the surface fleet became obsolete godlessly!
            1. Alex_59
              Alex_59 26 December 2017 11: 40 New
              0
              Quote: Serg65
              Well, if Aleksey, seriously, then in the 87-m the surface fleet became obsolete godlessly!

              I'm talking about the pace of construction and construction time.
              Deprecated in the fact that a bunch of ships built in the 60's have accumulated? Well, that is a given. At the beginning of the 90's, all this was disposed of. At the end of the 90, they also disposed of what is not outdated.
              A life...
  5. Vadim851
    Vadim851 26 December 2017 10: 13 New
    +1
    This is certainly good, very much so. But what about 9M96E and E2? A rocket is needed like air. With all the advantages, Cortica is not enough, very little to protect against modern means of attack from the air.
  6. Alex_59
    Alex_59 26 December 2017 10: 15 New
    +9
    Lord Well, what is it ... They didn’t finish the polent, the ships have been building for 6-7 years, let’s stick the “Caliber” there. And what’s only the “Caliber”, and let’s go there with the Zircon, you can attach a deck for the Su-33. Write more - the paper will endure. And forget about the concept of "unification" forever, think that in the series there are no three identical ships, who cares? Techies will figure out how to service it all.

    It would be better if the Redoubts were completed, the series was unified, and the terms were reduced to the 2 years of construction in order to roll out 40 buildings at three plants in 15 years, as in China - that would please me.
  7. dvina71
    dvina71 26 December 2017 10: 28 New
    0
    Head to think ..don't? In 20380, instead of inclined pu for uranium, everything will be installed .. the whole line of calibers and onyx is placed there .. on zircon .. there is generally a question more than answers.
    As for P-Redoubt ... they differ in 20380 and Gorshkov .. and back in 14g they successfully fired precisely from 20380.
    1. sivuch
      sivuch 26 December 2017 10: 33 New
      +1
      With Puma and without Furke?
      not really either.
  8. VohaAhov
    VohaAhov 26 December 2017 10: 38 New
    +2
    There is no project Polimenta-Reduta on the corvette of project 20380. There is only a Redoubt. And generally speaking. They didn’t finish the series, but they already wrinkled their turnips and were going to modernize them. Write that the corvette is unarmed. I would not say that. At 2000 tons, the displacement shoved weapons comparable to a frigate. And if the “Redoubt” worked as planned, then its air defense could shoot down air targets at ranges up to 120 km. And, it seems to me, this news is crazy.
  9. Berkut24
    Berkut24 26 December 2017 10: 54 New
    +1
    And the combination of Poliment-Reduta and the Shell will make it possible to create an impenetrable air defense zone in a radius of 100 km around the corvette

    At this point, “Almaz-Antey” more than once will receive a zvizdyule for this same “Poliment-Redoubt”.
  10. viktorch
    viktorch 26 December 2017 10: 54 New
    +2
    why, a polymer redoubt on a corvette, I think two dozen onyxes need to be shoved in there - this will be an even steeper project, no one will ever build it of course, but the paper will be a sight for sore eyes, we already have a paper monster - the leader is called, we’ll draw the younger brother escho.
    1. AlexKP
      AlexKP 27 December 2017 15: 05 New
      0
      “Thundering” - the corvette of project 20385. It is being completed afloat.
  11. FomaKinyaev
    FomaKinyaev 26 December 2017 11: 13 New
    +2
    I have a negative attitude towards such news. They will equip, modernize, purchase, invent .... They haven’t done anything yet, and the news is already there. Like gossips. Make and be silent, a talker is a godsend for a spy.
    1. faiver
      faiver 26 December 2017 12: 25 New
      +1
      I agree completely
    2. AlexKP
      AlexKP 27 December 2017 15: 06 New
      0
      “Thundering” - project 20385 corvette. Builds afloat, delivery in 18 g.
  12. Zomanus
    Zomanus 26 December 2017 13: 03 New
    0
    Here is the retinue for RTOs, allowing those to complete a combat mission.
    And next to the aircraft carrier such a ship to the place.
  13. NEXUS
    NEXUS 26 December 2017 15: 17 New
    +2
    as well as the anti-aircraft complex "Poliment-Redoubt".

    Which really does not want to mess. The question is, what will replace this complex?
  14. Alexander War
    Alexander War 26 December 2017 18: 09 New
    0
    Characteristics
  15. Nemesis
    Nemesis 26 December 2017 18: 23 New
    0
    In Redoubt there is no sense at all, it is a dead, not working system, which needs not to be supplemented, but replaced by Calm, or something else that will work ... It also makes sense to replace Uranium with Caliber ...
  16. Petrol cutter
    Petrol cutter 26 December 2017 20: 47 New
    +1
    Well, it's rather good than bad.
  17. Neputin
    Neputin 27 December 2017 11: 40 New
    +2
    I don’t know ... For me, it is obvious that a corvette-class ship should have only self-defense air defense. Frigate - self-defense and medium-range air defense. And zonal air defense can only be available to destroyers and cruisers. Well, put on the corvette only "shell". But they still have to specialize in shock and anti-submarine ones - the displacement will not allow to establish balanced weapons for all occasions. Then we will get both anti-submarine and shock corvettes with such armament that really will not "have a global analogue". And all the time we want to shove the non-pushable into a small displacement and get defective warships - sometimes without air defense, sometimes without anti-aircraft defense, then without anything at all, but with strike cruise missiles, which in a naval battle without decent target designation are just a pile of metal.
    1. KaPToC
      KaPToC 27 December 2017 21: 09 New
      0
      Quote: Neputin
      It’s quite obvious to me that a corvette-class ship should have only air defense

      Quote: Neputin
      And all the time we want to shove the non-pushable into a small displacement and get defective warships

      It is necessary to specialize corvettes, some in the anti-submarine version, others in the shock, others - air defense and so on.
  18. alexmach
    alexmach 28 December 2017 22: 33 New
    +1
    Quote: SHVEDsky_stol
    Here it is, excuse ahahah. I was directly expecting this answer that "The enterprise is not indicated," I found all the information in just a minute. Who is the developer, who is the Civil Code, and all of everything is all ... And you continue to speak out here that it is necessary to redo it, you are not capable of more, but only to fight and build something from yourself in the comments.

    Listen, are you insane? Why are you continuing to write your nonsense in response to my comments? Did you find something on the Internet? Well done congratulations. Now please return to the article, carefully re-read it and find out whose proposal this is about Callibra and the others we are discussing here. Developer? GK? All, all, all? Or an anonymous drunkard - a non-journalist?
    I do not want to continue any discussion with you, no matter what comments you would expect.
    You are rude.
    This is not the first time you have switched to a person and have been rude instead of discussing arguments.
    You are not able to discuss the topic and generally did not bring a single argument other than "yes who are you."
    I have stated my position, from your comments there is no sense at all. I do not want to read you anymore and I will not answer you anymore.