Military Review

Russia helped India build destroyer

65

INS Visakhapatnam


Vizakaptam ... Vizapatnam ... In general, it does not matter. Destroyer with a tail number D66, the lead ship of the type 15-Bravo of the naval forces of India. Bookmark year - 2013, launch - 2015, entry into service is expected in 2018.

INS Visakhapatnam was designed by the Naval Development Authority of India with the participation of specialists from the Northern Design Bureau (St. Petersburg).

The power plant - gas turbine, combined, type COGAG - two independent turbines for each propeller shaft. The ability to turn off one of the turbines at an economical rate increases fuel efficiency (because at full load, the efficiency of the gas turbine is higher than in the 50% power mode). As the main engines, two units MXNUME (36 gas turbines, two gearboxes) manufactured by Zorya-Mashproekt (Ukraine) are used.

The lines of the propeller shafts are made at the Baltic Shipyard (St. Petersburg).

As part of auxiliary power equipment, diesel engines manufactured by Bergen-KVM (Norway) are used; Four generator sets ”Vyartsilya” WCM-1000 (Finland) driven by Cummins KTA50G3 diesel engines (USA).

The hull is made at the shipyard Mazagon Doc Limited (Mumbai).

The most notable innovation of the 15B type destroyer is its network-centric BIUS, which allows it to provide high situational awareness for each combat position. In addition to the basic functions of the combat command and control system (analysis of incoming information, classification and prioritization of targets, selection and preparation weapons), the new version provides automatic distribution of energy between ship systems.

The creation of the radar complex and detection equipment for the Indian destroyer was carried out by the Israeli IAI Elta with limited participation of Indian specialists (Bharat Electronics) and the well-known European company Thales Group.


Destroyer of the previous type 15-Alpha ("Calcutta"), externally identical to the destroyers 15-Bravo


The Israelis offered the EL / M-2248 MF-STAR multi-function radar for monitoring the airspace and controlling missile weapons. According to the developer, the use of active phased antennas increases the efficiency of the MF-STAR radar when detecting unobtrusive targets in a difficult jamming environment. To counter radio interception systems, LPI technology is used (low probability of signal interception), at which the frequency of 1000 learning is tuned once a second. In addition to the basic functions, the radar can be used to adjust artillery fire in the bursts of falling shells.

The manufacturer draws attention to the low mass of the radar - the antenna post consisting of four AFARs, together with the underdeck equipment, weighs only about 7 tons.

The only controversial aspect of the Israeli radar is its operating range (decimeter waves, S-band). This made it possible to increase the detection range and level the influence of weather conditions, compared with similar systems operating in the centimeter wave band (APAR, SAMPSON, OPS-50). But, on the basis of world practice, such a decision should negatively affect the accuracy of tracking high-speed small-sized targets. Probably, the specialists of “Elta” managed to partially solve the problem due to the software signal processing algorithms.

The presence of two-coordinate Thales LW-08 two-coordinate radar with a horn transmitter and a parabolic reflector on a destroyer of the 21st century may be surprising. In my opinion, the only reason for the emergence of LW-08 is its manufacturer - the company Bharat Electronics, producing under license samples of the European systems of the previous generation.

Perfect enough for its time (1980-s), the system is used as a backup radar paired with a multifunctional Israeli MF-STAR. The indicated working range D is an outdated designation for the decimeter range with 15-30 wavelengths see.

The Israeli Barak-8 medium / long range air defense system (Molniya-8), capable of hitting air targets at ranges up to 70 km (some sources indicate the 100 km value), in the altitude range from 0 to 16 000 m. Among the advantages - active HOS, operating in the radio wave and thermal spectra (auxiliary IR-mode targeting with a small EPR).

Russia helped India build destroyer

Launch of anti-aircraft missiles from the destroyer type "Calcutta"


The complex is distinguished by its compactness (the launch mass of the 275 kg rocket), storage and launch of rocket ammunition is made from the CID. Among other advantages: a combat unit that is quite powerful for such a lightweight missile (60 kg). The presence of a controlled vector thrust. The rocket is equipped with a double-engagement engine, which makes it possible to realize the most favorable trajectories when flying to targets at different distances; as well as develop greater speed when approaching the goal.

The most significant disadvantage of the Bark missiles is the low cruising speed of the flight (2М) - five times slower than domestic Fortress missiles. In part, this problem is offset by the possibility of re-enabling the solid propellant rocket motor on the final part of the trajectory.

Another unpleasant feature is the launch from a specialized UVP, which forces you to have two types of launchers, without the possibility of unification and its use for other types of ammunition (Mk.41, European Sylver). However, if there is enough space on the ship, this problem fades into the background.

A total of 32 launch cells for anti-aircraft missiles are provided on board the Indian destroyer.

Total cost four sets of ship-borne air defense missile systems for destroyers of the type 15B under construction amounted, according to official data, to 630 million dollars (2017), a very moderate amount against the background of global trends.

If you do not take into account the personal interests of those responsible, the choice of Barak-8 as the main means of defense of the Indian fleet dictated by the compactness and relatively low cost of the complex (at the cost of deteriorating energy capabilities of missiles and limiting the range of interception). Barak-8 is a reasonable compromise that allows you to get capabilities close to the best naval air defense / missile defense systems of long range, at significantly lower costs.

The destroyer armament of the destroyer includes two modules (16 UVP) for launching two types of cruise missiles: the long-range cruise missile Nirbhay (Fearless, the Indian counterpart of Caliber) for attacking ground targets at a range of 1000 + km, and three-dimensional supersonic anti-ship missiles PJ-10 “BrahMos” (“Bakhmaputra-Moscow”, a joint development based on the P-800 “Onyx”).



Given the high characteristics of the Brahmos anti-ship missiles (low speed 2,5М +) and the number of missiles, the Indian destroyer in the anti-ship configuration (all 16 mines are occupied by anti-ship missiles) surpasses all existing types of ships in shock power, including even Soviet-style missile cruisers.

Of course, this assessment does not correspond to the real combat situation. These are all technical notes submitted for a sober assessment of threats emanating from the Indian “missile carrier”.

The destroyer is equipped with a set of classic anti-submarine weapons of various generations, the real effectiveness of which is difficult to estimate. The presence on board of two anti-submarine / multi-purpose helicopters (such as “Sea King” or HAL “Dhruv”) expands the boundaries of the PLO zone. On the other hand, the absence of rocket-torpedoes and the dubious characteristics of the GAS do not give confidence in the fight against modern submarines.

The destroyer is equipped with the sonar of the Indian company Bharat Electronics. Obviously, we are not talking about the undercarriage gas, because in the presented pictures at the moment of launching, there is no characteristic “drop” (a massive sonar fairing in the nose of the destroyer). The presence of a towed low-frequency antenna is also not reported.


INS Visakhapatnam sailing afloat, caught on camera during the launch of the INS Khanderi submarine


For the destruction of submarines in the near zone, self-guided torpedoes of caliber 533 mm and two obsolete RBU-6000 are provided. The presence of the latter is only a given of traditions. Bombers (even reactive) are completely ineffective in modern conditions. The only more or less realistic assignment is the destruction of torpedoes with their help. This task also contains many unknowns; to counter the torpedo threat, it is more useful to use various towed traps.

Speaking of traps. The destroyer is equipped with the Kavach passive jamming complex of its own Indian design. Kavach missiles are capable of creating veils of radio reflecting particles at a distance of up to 7 nautical miles.

Artillery. The destroyer is completed with 127-mm universal installation - a modern development of the company OTO Melara, also installed on European destroyers and frigates. Barrel length - 64 caliber. The firing range can reach 30 km. Fully automatic with rate of fire 30 + shots / min.

The reason why these systems are still used in the fleet remains unclear. The power of 5 projectiles is too small to hit any possible targets. On the other hand, 17 tons - a small price for the opportunity to make a warning shot under the nose of the offending vessel. Or finish off the “youngsters” by making 150 guns of mercy shots.

For the defense in the near zone, two batteries are provided - each consists of two six-barrel AK-630 automatic rifles and a fire control radar. It is noteworthy that, unlike the US Navy, the Indians do not save on such things. Or not yet fully realized the horror of the situation. Shoot down missiles near the ship - you can, but it's too late. In real combat, the benefits of any rapid-fire cannons (“Phalanx”, “Goalkeeper”, etc.) remain in question - fragments of downed rockets, one way or another, reach and cause damage to ships.

conclusions

Structurally, INS Visakhapatnam and three of its fellows continue the ideas embodied in the destroyers of the previous type “Calcutta” (adopted in the fleet in 2014-2016), differing from them by increased armament and more modern “stuffing”.

The technical level of the destroyers of the Indian Navy does not yet reach the favorites - first-class destroyers of Great Britain, the United States and Japan. And the presence of a dozen foreign contractors does not contribute to an increase in combat effectiveness in the event of an aggravation of the international situation. And it indicates only the weakness of the Indian military-industrial complex.

At the same time, the Hindus managed to build one of the most interesting destroyers in their class (7000 tons), which differs from the standard concept of the American “burka”. The project’s weaknesses are leveled by its impressive anti-ship weapons. Unlike most fleets, Indians do not build ships to launch a pair of rockets around the ruins in the desert.

The creation of the destroyer type 15-Bravo was also attended by Russian specialists who gained experience in designing modern warships. Experience is what we get when we don't get what we want. Our Navy such ships would also have come in handy.

Author:
65 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Theodore
    Theodore 19 March 2018 06: 50
    +1
    On the descent, did the elephants dance?
    1. Artek
      Artek 19 March 2018 19: 23
      +1
      and where is the bulb on the bow? The speed will not be high.
      1. Seaflame
        Seaflame 19 March 2018 21: 49
        +4
        It also caught my eye. Without a bulb, fuel consumption is growing, and it’s convenient to place a sonar antenna in it
  2. Santa Fe
    19 March 2018 06: 54
    +2
    barak-8 starting cells
  3. andrewkor
    andrewkor 19 March 2018 06: 54
    +1
    The most important drawback is the lack of armor, so 500 tons!
    1. chingachguc
      chingachguc 20 March 2018 16: 36
      0
      The Falkland War showed that without armor, ships oh how bad ...
  4. svp67
    svp67 19 March 2018 07: 06
    +8
    The most annoying thing about all this is that our fleet will NOT SEE new destroyers for a long time ....
    1. NEXUS
      NEXUS 19 March 2018 16: 44
      +9
      Quote: svp67
      The most annoying thing about all this is that our fleet will NOT SEE new destroyers for a long time ....

      As I understand it, the frigates of Project 22350M with an increased displacement of 1100 tons, which is close to the displacement of the destroyer, will occupy the niche of new destroyers. But while there are no bookmarks of such frigates, and therefore, I think, until 20 we will be content only with frigates and corvettes.
  5. kvs207
    kvs207 19 March 2018 07: 20
    +1
    Quote: andrewkor
    The most important drawback is the lack of armor, so 500 tons!

    For the author, especially)))
  6. Romario_Argo
    Romario_Argo 19 March 2018 07: 48
    +1
    the author wrote an article not in his characteristic style.
    usually writes how everything is bad in our Russian Navy.
    and in the Indian Navy it means not so bad, too - like normal (!)
    double standarts (!)
    Indian destroyer - baby, in front of our Frigate Ave. 22350
    1. tlauicol
      tlauicol 19 March 2018 07: 50
      +9
      Yeah, better baby than stillborn
      1. Romario_Argo
        Romario_Argo 19 March 2018 08: 08
        +2
        tlauikol (Ivan)

        Yeah, better baby than stillborn

        technology development is not taken from the air
        I will show you this comment in the 2020 year
        when the modernized Northern shipyard, and not only, will begin to surprise everyone (!)
        1. tlauicol
          tlauicol 19 March 2018 08: 11
          +5
          but promises to master these same technologies and hand over the ship / boat five, ten, fifteen years ago are taken from the air

        2. NordOst16
          NordOst16 19 March 2018 08: 30
          0
          For two years they lowered it, but the frigate no longer has analogues in terms of construction time. Well, okay, I hope you're right, but it’s sad so far. And, most importantly, that there is enough money for a large series
    2. Santa Fe
      19 March 2018 08: 10
      +10
      Quote: Romario_Argo
      and in the Indian Navy it means not so bad, too - like normal (!)

      and what for them to worry

      4 new destroyers over the past 5 years
      "Calcutta", "Kochi", "Chennai" + "Visakapatnam" (highly ready)

      the second aircraft carrier is being built

      anti-submarine aviation upgraded - Boeing P-8I Poseidon
    3. The comment was deleted.
      1. donavi49
        donavi49 19 March 2018 09: 30
        +8
        If Polement flies, it will be the last seconds of 22350. laughing Since he has already begun to fragment.

        RCC is there - in general, the shock sector 1 in 1.
        15B radars are not just more interesting, but 2 have undeniable advantages: they work, give out standard characteristics and they are brought up and suitable for combat use (unlike - where everyone is winning the beam from the web to the web).

        Similarly, according to Redoubt - Barack-8 is worse, but it is brought up, tested and suitable for military use. The redoubt is still years old (even if 22350 is accepted this year).

        With a cannon - I’d put it on Melara, it’s more interesting and most important, for her a bunch of delicious shells even now buy.

        For the rest - 2 helicopter is a plus. Overloading systems and weapons is also a plus.
        1. mvg
          mvg 19 March 2018 11: 15
          +4
          If Polement flies, it will be the last seconds 22350

          I didn’t understand the redoubt, the tonnage of 4500 against 7000 rubles, and Western engines and BIOS are easier, so it’s unlikely that something more interesting will be shoved. At 22350, there is currently neither an air defense system nor a shock. I respect you, according to the normal comments, but I have an uncle in the state commission for admission. There is no frigate 22350 as a warship. They drive bullshit on the screens.
          And on the radar, I'm sorry, but the Jews are more interesting. I have a friend (classmate) with LETI who makes them for Jews. And really evaluates the level. Somehow not in our favor.
          1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
            Andrei from Chelyabinsk 19 March 2018 15: 14
            +2
            Quote: mvg
            On 22350, there is currently neither an air defense system, nor a shock.

            Where did the shock go? UKKS standard, long-tested, calibrated for a long time in service.
  7. KVU-NSVD
    KVU-NSVD 19 March 2018 08: 11
    +3
    Not a ship, but some kind of Rainbow salad, in which only a trough is local ... belay Poor little navy backers, I’d have used a cuckooder ...
    Such ships would also have come to our Navy by the way.
    God forbid from such misfortune ...
    1. mvg
      mvg 19 March 2018 08: 42
      +8
      What's the problem? If all this works together. India has no sanctions, they take the best in the world. Maybe Russia can do diesel or AFAR, or ship air defense systems, or gas turbines, maybe it generally builds ships of the first rank?
      1. KVU-NSVD
        KVU-NSVD 19 March 2018 09: 00
        +6
        What's the problem?
        The problem is that in peacetime the maintenance of this ship is very expensive and confused from the point of view of military logistics and in terms of organizing comprehensive maintenance and upgrades ... If you do not have the full range of technologies for building a ship with the necessary characteristics, you can at least be limited to single manufacturers for complexes , such as movement, weapons, Bius, etc. ... Otherwise, it turns out that with serious problems, even in one of the subsystems, it will be necessary to convene and organize a "world consultation". In wartime, such a ship can even stay afloat stand up for eternity because of the impossibility of even limited use - because it is not known in which warring camp suppliers will be .. hi
        1. Santa Fe
          19 March 2018 09: 09
          +1
          Quote: KVU-NSVD
          You can at least be limited to single manufacturers for complexes, such as movement, armament, Bius and so on ...

          This can only Americans
          It was necessary to completely order a ship from Northrop Grumman
          1. KVU-NSVD
            KVU-NSVD 19 March 2018 09: 24
            +6
            [/ Quote]
            Quote: Santa Fe
            [quote = KVU-NSVD] can at least be limited to single producers of complexes, such as movement, weapons, Bius, etc. ...

            This can only Americans
            It was necessary to completely order a ship from Northrop Grumman

            Anyone can do this, if they choose competently suppliers from a long-term perspective, and this is a matter of geopolitical strategy. I agree that it’s easier to order a ship from a foreign manufacturer with the maximum possible configuration for a specific geopolitical camp, but I also want to provide my work. India generally drives itself into a plug - with their approach to rearmament, in the event of a serious war, local armed forces may, with seeming power, turn out to be a “colossus with clay feet” Greetings, Oleg hi Continue to bend your line in articles, not paying attention to banter. I always read with pleasure, although I often disagree, but no less common thoughts (no offense, it's just my personal opinion) smile good
        2. donavi49
          donavi49 19 March 2018 09: 36
          +8
          Using bookmarks on command is highly dramatic. This is revealed and managed (for example, placing in the architecture of another system that issues only certain commands = even if this system accepts a code command on a bookmark device, it simply will not process it and will not issue it).

          The war, as commanders think, and especially the war with the enemy No. 1 for India, will pass quickly. Everything will be decided in 30-50 days maximum. Even if they impose an embargo on supplies and services, nothing bad will happen.

          After a good war, the embargo will be lifted. For the winner will be ready to pay for the new equipment, which is necessary as shown by the war and the restoration of the existing one.

          Well, the loser will remove the last shorts from the population in order to skimp on new equipment, in return for the lost one. Lobbyists will not miss such a market.
          1. mvg
            mvg 19 March 2018 11: 19
            +1
            There will be no war against China for 2 months. They won’t hold on and use nuclear weapons, it will be tasteless.
      2. Okolotochny
        Okolotochny 19 March 2018 11: 12
        +1
        How do you poor poor in Russia ??.
        1. mvg
          mvg 20 March 2018 14: 59
          +2
          So noticeable? I, like, work in Gazprom. The beginning of a small department. And there is a summer house, with a stove.
  8. konstantin68
    konstantin68 19 March 2018 09: 08
    +2
    Eh, we would have at least five of these!
    And we help everyone ...
    1. faiver
      faiver 19 March 2018 09: 20
      +1
      heels is the Indians just right, we need a couple of dozen ... hi
  9. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 19 March 2018 10: 43
    +3
    The destroyer turned out to be stronger than Peter the Great.
    Collected all the best from all manufacturers of equipment.
    1. avt
      avt 19 March 2018 11: 05
      +7
      Quote: voyaka uh
      The destroyer turned out to be stronger than Peter the Great.

      Azochenway! Can everyone cry now? wassat
    2. Okolotochny
      Okolotochny 19 March 2018 11: 14
      +2
      It’s like who is stronger - a karate or a judoka. Warrior, you kind of more or less sane, were, before.
      1. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 19 March 2018 11: 41
        +1
        "This is the type who is stronger - a karate or a judoka" ////

        It's right... laughing
        But sometimes karate and judoka are found in mixed martial arts. See?
        Estimate the number of offensive and defensive weapons ... Somewhere comparable? Bramos here - Granite there.
        1. Okolotochny
          Okolotochny 19 March 2018 22: 22
          +1
          IIIiiiiiii? Here Onyx (Bramos), and Granite, and not that (who is on Peter the Great. And there?
      2. Conserp
        Conserp 21 March 2018 00: 23
        +4
        Quote: Okolotochny
        It’s like who is stronger - a karate or a judoka.

        Rather, it is who is stronger - a karate or a detachment of SOBR.
        ------
        Peter:
        20 anti-ship missiles "Granite", sometimes with YaBCh
        10 TA / PU - 20 PLUR
        2x130 mm AU
        SAM "Fort", 94 SAM
        SAM "Dagger", 64 SAM
        ZRAK "Dagger", 192 SAM
        2x6 slot machines
        RBU
        3 Helicopter
        ------
        Visa
        16 RCC "Bramos", export scrap
        4 TA
        127 mm AU
        SAM "Barak", 32 missiles
        4 machines
        RBU
        2 Helicopter

        Here on any point a little of that, but Petya is an unarmed boat. And what will happen after modernization?
    3. faiver
      faiver 19 March 2018 11: 34
      +1
      oh Chota doubts overwhelm me, as I understand it, every sandpiper praises its swamp - taking into account the number of Israeli components on this ship bully
    4. Alexander War
      Alexander War 19 March 2018 12: 48
      +3
      laughing Then our Corvette is stronger than the destroyer Arly-Burke
    5. Alexander War
      Alexander War 19 March 2018 12: 50
      +3
      laughing The destroyer turned out to be stronger than Peter the Great. laughing laughing laughing Oh, these experts without a mat part
      1. mvg
        mvg 20 March 2018 15: 05
        +3
        Yes, as if a Jew, God forgive me, in the mat part you will surpass a couple of times. Without modesty. And for the military unit com BC-2. Not Petit, of course, but only MRK, and be more modest, cheers patriot.
    6. abc_alex
      abc_alex 20 March 2018 01: 08
      +2
      Yes? And what can he now deliver a nuclear strike on the enemy’s AOG at a distance of 500 km? Or shell a coastal position at such a distance with a heavy rocket?
      Can it provide air defense connections?

      Or does he have comparable autonomy with Peter? :) Here's a hunt for you to praise everything where your Israeli crafts were noted ... Well, the ship turned out, but by no means is it stronger than the Orlan.
  10. Okolotochny
    Okolotochny 19 March 2018 11: 15
    +1
    I drew attention to this - it’s not the first article that Barak 8 is advertising, super-duper, etc. Used somewhere? Which countries are shipped to?
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 19 March 2018 11: 50
      +3
      Barak-8 is a great success of our PVC. In addition to India, they were bought by Singapore and Azerbaijan.
      The missile is specialized against RCC. But it can take small BRs. Beats on the opposite course
      therefore, its speed is not so important.
      But even greater success is the marine MSA (radars, computers) of the Elta company. There is a huge
      market. Not only Indians are buying, but also Americans for their “coastal zone” trimarans
      1. Okolotochny
        Okolotochny 19 March 2018 22: 24
        +1
        Four countries are operators. Little.
      2. abc_alex
        abc_alex 20 March 2018 01: 13
        +1
        Against which RCC? If against the "Harpoon" - I believe. And against heavy domestic anti-ship missiles that fly and maneuver at speeds greater than 2 Mach, the two-swing Barack is unlikely to be effective. Moreover, when choosing a radar decimeter range. EMNIP in such radars has a problem with the detection of objects on the background of the sea.
        1. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 20 March 2018 09: 38
          +6
          Hindus bought Barak-8 after they have tested
          he confidently shot down (them) Bramos.
          They have on the destroyers, so to speak, both poison and antidote in one bottle good :
          and Bramos and Barack
          1. Charik
            Charik 21 March 2018 12: 50
            0
            so this brahmos current they have and let them knock down their brahmos
    2. Conserp
      Conserp 20 March 2018 21: 16
      +1
      Quote: Okolotochny
      This is not the first time that an advertisement for Barak 8, super-duper, etc.


      Oddly enough, the same Oleg Kaptsov sprinkled an equally enchantingly idiotic and deceitful article last year about the complete futility of all air defense systems.
      1. Okolotochny
        Okolotochny 20 March 2018 21: 58
        +2
        Kaptsov is a LOOKING, that he is constantly looking for something, why he is renouncing it. laughing
  11. konstantin68
    konstantin68 19 March 2018 11: 32
    +1
    Quote: faiver
    heels is the Indians just right, we need a couple of dozen ... hi

    Yes, at least five at the beginning, some years before 2022. Given the volume of our radar / GAS, we also need ships of 7-8 tons of deadweight. And heels another 1135 6 years to 2020. The minimum program.
  12. Wolka
    Wolka 19 March 2018 12: 24
    0
    baby, but how else to walk ...
  13. Mooh
    Mooh 19 March 2018 12: 39
    +1
    well-known European company “Thales Group”

    And why not just Phallus groups then? There will be a reverie with a phallus, you understand.
    Thales Group (['talɛs], cheat. "Thales") is an international industrial group that produces information systems for aerospace, military and marine applications.
    1. Santa Fe
      19 March 2018 19: 55
      +3
      You are right - it is better not to try to translate foreign personal names and names. Leave as is

      Except for cases when the word has a clear (and corresponding 100% meaning) analogue in Russian
      Quote: MooH
      And then immediately the phallus groups?

      The company is named after the ancient Greek philosopher and mathematician Thales.
  14. vadim dok
    vadim dok 19 March 2018 13: 34
    +2
    Since when has the marching speed of the Fagot air defense system been 10M? (5 times faster than the Barak Rocket)? The marching speed of the Fagot 2100 m / s = 2100 ÷ 340 = 6,2 M.
  15. Borik
    Borik 19 March 2018 17: 28
    +2
    Quote: mvg
    If Polement flies, it will be the last seconds 22350

    I didn’t understand the redoubt, the tonnage of 4500 against 7000 rubles, and Western engines and BIOS are easier, so it’s unlikely that something more interesting will be shoved. At 22350, there is currently neither an air defense system nor a shock. I respect you, according to the normal comments, but I have an uncle in the state commission for admission. There is no frigate 22350 as a warship. They drive bullshit on the screens.
    And on the radar, I'm sorry, but the Jews are more interesting. I have a friend (classmate) with LETI who makes them for Jews. And really evaluates the level. Somehow not in our favor.


    Either his uncle is sitting somewhere, then his friend has an egghead fumbled in electronics, then go and his girlfriend in intelligence is not one of the last agents. That's how he knows everything.
  16. Megamarcel
    Megamarcel 19 March 2018 19: 33
    +1
    But Russia does not need such ships. This is not having any analogies in the legendary miracle Yudo, which is not a sin to show in the parade. Not. Better to cut budgets for reconstruction. Have come. India can make ships better than us ...
    1. abc_alex
      abc_alex 20 March 2018 01: 18
      0
      Set aside nerves. :)
      Well, where did you see "India can ships better build us"? This is not a ship, this is some kind of international. Starting from Ukraine and Russia, ending with Israel and Finland. All key systems are alien. Almost all weapons are foreign. And, as I understand it, whoever produced it installs it. So it’s calmer ...
  17. evil partisan
    evil partisan 19 March 2018 21: 19
    +2
    low marching flight speed (2M) - five times slower than domestic Fort air defense missiles.
    I didn’t get it. And what: "Fort" marching speed 10M ?? belay
  18. yoyo1984
    yoyo1984 19 March 2018 21: 41
    +2
    Kaptsov? - Yes, sir! So you can not read!
  19. Conserp
    Conserp 19 March 2018 22: 43
    0
    INS Visakhapatnam Visakaptam ... Visapapnam ...


    Visa, grabbing us.
  20. Conserp
    Conserp 19 March 2018 23: 17
    +1
    Given the high characteristics of the Brahmos anti-ship missiles (low speed 2,5М +) and the number of missiles, the Indian destroyer in the anti-ship configuration (all 16 mines are occupied by anti-ship missiles) surpasses all existing types of ships in shock power, including even Soviet-style missile cruisers.


    Thank you, neighing.

    Frigate 22350 - the same 16 pieces of "Caliber" / "Onyx". Only on Russian ships, the Caliber and Onyx are not export scraps that have been crippled in accordance with the MTCR, and they also happen to have nuclear warheads.

    The cruiser 1164 is also 16, but at times more slaughter "Volcanoes".

    Petya - 20 even more killer “Granites”. Their electronics, by the way, have been modernized.

    Let’s pretend that we didn’t talk about submarines at all - absolutely hell is already beginning there: the same “Ash” can carry 62 “Caliber” or “Onyx” at once.

    The reason these systems are still used in the fleet remains unclear.

    Iksperd writes!
    1. Charik
      Charik 21 March 2018 12: 53
      0
      the same “Ash” can carry 62 “Caliber” or “Onyx” at the same time. seriously chtoli
  21. gig334
    gig334 20 March 2018 22: 33
    +1
    A beautiful destroyer, Russia can only dream of this and lick its lips. It's a shame. We build others, but we save on ourselves. That's really how you want in the USSR, then they were so proud of our fleet. now is not the scale.
  22. polkovnik manuch
    polkovnik manuch 24 March 2018 15: 36
    0
    And with the destroyers we have a “tobacco business”! The "Leader" is still only on the layout, When there will be new handsome EMs in our Navy, it seems they boasted that we already do turbines better and cheaper than poop, Just about building new EMs - nothing.
    1. Kartur220
      Kartur220 April 8 2018 07: 53
      0
      And where are you, my dear, we see a powerful shipbuilding industry? I’m only on TV on the first and second channels. You see, our powerful people are very busy people, they have no time to think about industry and the construction of all kinds of ships and submarines there.
      It is very difficult for them to find time in the tight schedule of total theft of budget money for the development of industry and the construction of ships. And when time appears, money bye-bye. And here again we are waiting for turbines of our own production, Polement-Reduta of this unfortunate, etc. And most importantly, I believe there is no political will to stop this disgrace. If there is a will, there will be a fleet.
  23. Usher
    Usher 18 June 2019 19: 52
    0
    "The reason why these systems are still in use in the navy remains unclear. There is too little power in the 5 'rounds to hit any possible target." WHAT ??? Will you shoot at boats and small ships with Brahmos?
    "It is noteworthy that, unlike the US Navy, the Indians do not skimp on such things. Or they have not yet fully realized the horror of the situation. It is possible to shoot down missiles near the ship, but it is too late. In a real battle, any rapid-fire cannon is useful (Phalanx , “Goalkeeper”, etc.) remains questionable - fragments of downed missiles, one way or another, reach and damage ships. " apparently for some reason the United States just put the "Falanx" and "Goalkeepers" put on the European. But the author knows better.