Suitcases without handles. Navy buys a series of useless ships

323
According to the plans of the Navy fleet, on Thursday, December 20, 2018, the Andreevsky flag should be hoisted on the so-called patrol ship of project 22160 "Vasily Bykov". I must say that this event is not ordinary. The fleet, it was, got useless ships. It happened that he built something with his last money. But in order to immediately get a series of useless, almost inapplicable for the purpose ships, in the conditions of a shrinking budget, ships that not only do not affect the country's security, but indirectly make it worse - this is close to a record. This is a certain level that was not so easy to take. Such deep falls are very rare. But it happened, our Navy was able to do this.





In 2013, the Navy seemed to have stepped over some edge in shipbuilding programs. It was announced that production of the 20385 project’s corvettes was halted due to the high price. At the same time, work began on a much more expensive and low-capacity ship of the 20386 project, to which huge funds were spent (and which may not be handed over to the fleet). the stage of work on the creation of the first patrol ship for the Russian fleet belonging to the OPV class according to the international classification - offshore patrol vessel, sea patrol vessel. The project to create such a ship received a number 22160.

In February, 2014, on the Central Naval Portal the following message appeared:

The command of the Russian Navy has abandoned the concept of a water area protection corvette (OVR). Instead, plans to create a patrol ships. The Commander-in-Chief of the Russian Navy, Admiral Viktor Chirkov, stated this in a blitz-interview with the Central Naval Portal.
The Commander-in-Chief does not see a prospect in the creation of ships previously designated as "Corvette OVR". One of the main tasks of the OVR is to ensure the protection and defense of naval forces in the areas of naval bases and in the territories adjacent to them. This task is now carried out by coastal surveillance equipment, stationary sonar stations and coastal missile and artillery troops, armed with anti-ship missiles of different ranges, as well as anti-submarine and shock Aviation.
Rejecting the corvette, the Navy turned to the idea of ​​creating patrol ships - less armed, but with greater autonomy and versatility, capable, including, to go on long hikes. The design of the patrol ship will be handled by the North Design Bureau.
What the new patrol ships will be is prematurely speaking.


Hearing this from the mouth of the commander in chief of the Navy was simply monstrous. After all, even now, after nearly five years, Russia cannot produce anti-submarine airplanes, and what is there to produce, even normal can not draw pictures, and the situation with FOSS is even worse - about those organizations that make them you can safely say that it would be better they did nothing, at least the money would remain, and a zero result would be achieved for free. In such conditions, to protect the waters near the naval bases really could only be exclusively ships, with good capabilities in the fight against submarines. And they, at least, could be produced (it is possible even now), and if you use all the available domestic backlog correctly, then these will be quite good ships, really capable of providing at least PLO and giving the main forces of the fleet to leave the bases without being shot with impunity by torpedoes from submarines.

But in reality, the commander in chief was exactly the opposite - we, as Americans, could allegedly operate with arrays of reliable and efficient bottom sensors, and seemed to have modern anti-submarine aircraft. I wonder where everything went?

In late February, the 2014 lead ship of a series of six units, the Vasily Bykov, was laid at the Zelenodolsk plant. This event makes it even more strange to look at the words of Admiral V. Chirkov given in the quoted message: “What will be the new patrol ships? - It’s too early to say».

How could this be if there were weeks left before the bookmark? The commander did not know what kind of ships would be laid in a few weeks?

A little bit later, in an interview with Rossiyskaya Gazeta, in October 2014, Chirkov clarified his position:
We also plan to replenish the Black Sea Fleet with six patrol ships of the high seas project 22160. They are already collected at the Zelenodolsk shipyard. The crews of the ships, in particular, will be engaged in patrolling the territorial waters in the 200-mile exclusive economic zone of Russia, will take over the protection of our ships and vessels at sea crossing and will perform tasks related to the defense of naval bases and water areas.
Generally speaking, ships of the 22160 project can be considered as a modern means of responding to new threats at sea. I am referring to the suppression of smuggling and piracy, the search and assistance to victims of marine disasters, environmental monitoring of the environment, etc.


It was an even wilder statement.

Firstly, according to the current legislation, patrolling of territorial waters and the exclusive economic zone in Russia is entrusted to the Coast Guard of the FSB, about which unequivocally indicated on the website of the FSB, with given excerpts from laws and regulations:
Since 2003, the task of protecting and protecting the economic and other legitimate interests of the state in inland marine waters, in the territorial sea, in the exclusive economic zone, on the continental shelf of the Russian Federation has been assigned to the FSB of Russia, of which the border agencies are part.


Why should the Navy do this? For BOHR, the FSB builds and builds ships designed specifically to perform such tasks, and the FSB itself is just a law enforcement structure, whose task is to ensure the law and order. The task of the Navy is to fight, sink enemy ships, shoot down planes, burn out coastal defenses, land assault forces, and so on.

Even in the "Fundamentals of the Naval Policy" about the protection of the exclusive economic zone and the continental shelf the same thing is said - this is the FSB case, although the need for the Navy to interact with the FSB is mentioned.

Apparently, the PR specialists of the Ministry of Defense came to their senses, and soon the ships of the 22160 project began to be positioned as "anti-piracy" and "carrying modular weapons."

But besides the “first”, there is the “second”.

These ships are constructive or incapable of doing what Admiral V. Chirkov claimed or are capable of badly. They can be limitedly used against pirates, in wartime they are almost completely useless, they cannot protect the naval bases ... frankly speaking, they can almost nothing.

Let us analyze the correspondence of the declared functionality of these ships to their real capabilities (with the exception of the activity of replacing the forces of the FSB, which is a priori so meaningless that it is not worth mentioning it - the FSB itself may well carry out the tasks of the FSB).

Let's start with the anti-piracy functions, which are supported by the propaganda machine of the Ministry of Defense.

So, at first glance, everything is fine - there are two boats on the right and left on the board and cranes for their descent. This is enough to have an inspection group or a capture group on two boats - one with a fire cover group, the second is an inspection / assault group, whose task is to climb aboard under the cover of the first one. There is a place for a helicopter, which is usually used for aerial reconnaissance, and fire suppression "from above", as well as for disembarking on high-ship ships in the absence of resistance. A helicopter and two boats are a standard anti-piracy set of forces for any Navy.


The US Navy's Arleigh Burke-class ship dispatches a search team to a boat whose crew is suspected of piracy. The helicopter provides insurance.

There is even a third boat - a low-profile air assault boat (XSL) of the 02800 project, high-speed and armored, located in the aft slip.

Here it is necessary to make a reservation. In fact, the Navy plans to use helicopter + DSL tactics with an inspection / assault group. This is wrong and dangerous, and life will force the Navy to "be like everyone else" and not reinvent the wheel, since there is a possibility. But about DSL later.

Anti-piracy actions can be divided into main groups:
- Ship escort.
- Inspection of suspicious vessels (usually pirate ships-queens) and the arrest of suspects on board.
- Delivery of suspects to the nearest country for trial.
- Reflection of attacks by pirates before they penetrate the attacked ship.
- The release of the vessel seized by pirates in the absence of hostages ("classics of the genre" - tanker "Moscow University").
- The release of the vessel seized by pirates in the presence of hostages on board.
- Sinking of pirate ships and boats.
- Rescue people from the water and various boats.

At the same time, depending on the place and time, these actions are performed under different weather conditions and waves.

How adequate is the 22160 project to these tasks?

Regarding escort ships, no questions. The course of the “merchant” in the Gulf of Aden 10-13 knots is fully within the power of the new “patrolman” in any unrest. However, when leaving the Gulf of Aden to the east, into the open ocean, nuances begin.

The fact is that outside the Gulf of Aden, just along the Somali coast, strong monsoons almost always blow, only in the winter period the wind is almost always northeast, and usually accelerates the waves to a height of 3-4 meters. This happens from October to March.

Then there is the off-season, and from April to the end of October south-western monsoons blow, and the specificity is that from August to October the wind is stronger and the wave height is higher than the average for the year, the latter is often in the range from four and a half to six meters

So, whatever “unlimited” was not the seaworthiness of the patrol vessel, and nature is not fooled, and on such a wave it will chat. Pirates, who in this region are acting quite well, will also (and chatter), but firstly they are not so long at sea to lose their fighting capacity from long rolling, and secondly, they are dealing with unarmed people and ships. But the patrol personnel will have to deal with precisely armed people, and a long stay in the exhausting roll will have a very negative impact on the ability of the same marines to conduct combat operations. In addition, taking off and landing a helicopter with such a wave from a small ship causes serious doubts. We look how it looks in reality. Danish Navy.



That's about 22160 will behave on the waves, maybe a little less pitching and a little higher tank fillability due to the specific shape of the body.

Here we must understand that, firstly, the helicopter shown is lighter than the Ka-29 or 27 PS, and it is much easier to “catch” the amplitude of the deck rolling, and secondly, the attack by NATO anti-submarine pilots is much higher than the future ones anti-piracy "crews of naval aviation naval. And we still do not consider the fact that NATO has and uses quite massively different assistance systems for landing on a rocking deck, which the helicopter crew cannot count on from our new patrol vessel. And okay, if the helicopter could not lift, and if it can not be put? Who is there in the ocean to help and how?

Thus, we find the first limitation - the patrolman, when performing tasks on escorting ships, will not always be able to use the helicopter, and the personnel will wear down the pitching, undermining its combat capability. Or, you will have to stay inside the Gulf of Aden, without going to the ocean, even when you receive a signal for help (which may not be possible).

Precisely for this reason, even countries that have OPV class patrol vessels do not use them in anti-piracy operations far from bases! These ships are in use in countries where the Navy performs the tasks of the Coast Guard! They are not used on long hikes. We look, that in the course in anti-piracy activity.

Singapore uses amphibious ships - Endurance Class DKKD with a displacement of 6500 tons.

Suitcases without handles. Navy buys a series of useless ships


Denmark - Absalon class multipurpose ships6600 tons.



US - or naval warships (for example, the destroyers "Arly Burke") or Coast Guard ships (for example Legend-class). The latter are larger and heavier than our Project 11356 frigates and have several dozen reserve seats for special forces, medics, translators, rescued people, etc.



Spain - multipurpose class ships Buque_de_Acción_Marítima. Displacement 2860 tons.

The list can go on and on. Here are the old "sea wolves" - the British. A huge ship of complex supply was used as a floating base, with three helicopters, huge areas of internal premises and a cruising range. RFA Fort Victoria. 31000 tons.



The Chinese are more modest, and chase ordinary frigates project 054A, with a displacement of 3900 tons.

Indians have special-built patrol vessels - Saryu-class / class "Saryu". Displacement - 2900 tons.



Ships operating in the ocean are made large and heavy. This is not from stupidity or whim. This is because the personnel during the months-long anti-piracy operation must always be combat-ready, and even if the storm does not allow the boats to be lowered into the water, then he must not lift the helicopter into the air and take it back. And for this the ship must be large.

It is worth noting that all examples weapons aboard more than one cannon and several machine guns.

Again, pay attention to the fact that in Britain, the OPV is quite possible for itself - the River-2 class / ships of the River-2 class. But for some reason no one thinks of sending them somewhere further on the English Channel, the coast of Ireland and the western part of the North Sea. There, near their native shores, they work as “frontier guards” and this is what such ships exist for.

An interesting example is provided by Malaysia, in which the problem of piracy is very relevant right in the domestic waters. In order not to overpay on the one hand, and to have an effective means of dealing with the other, the Malaysians converted several bulk carriers into floating special forces bases. The head vessel of this type, Bunga Mas Lima, was even engaged in rescuing Malaysian students from Egypt during the Arab spring, although it mostly fights with the feast of the “house”.



And only the Russians turned out to be the most “smart” and plan to use OPV where they simply cannot effectively and in all cases be used.

No, in calm weather, in the depths of the Gulf of Aden, everything will be fine. But it is somehow strange to rely on the fact that you are lucky with the weather and the enemy (pirates) will not wield where we cannot act. Especially since in fact he is wielding there.

Regarding the inspection of suspicious boats - then everything will turn out if you use inflatable boats on the sides and do not play superheroes at DSL. We look again at what it looks like - a group on the same boat insures - if in a crowd of potential pirates someone tries to throw a grenade at an inspection party, then the shooters from the insure boat will be able to kill such a person faster than he does something.


British with "Fort Victoria". One of the boats does not moor, the shooter is ready to shoot a crowd of pirates with a machine gun with tape feed.

This is a standard tactic, so they do everything, from a helicopter a grenade, clamped in the hand of a gangster, cannot be seen, hidden under the rags of Uzi, too. At the same time from the open top of the boat can start shooting all who are on board. DSHL with its housing closed on top here is only to the detriment, and an attempt to use it alone, without a second boat, is fraught with the very grenade thrown over the side, or several. Watching pirates on deck while mooring from a moored boat does not always work because of the high side of the "womb".


The military takes the "pirate" on board. The second boat covers the landing group, the helicopter is in the air.

Also, do not use DSHL because of its dubious ride quality on a high wave - the boat is flat, the hull inside is low, people on board just beat the armored ceiling with unpredictable health effects. This is approximately how the passage of a fully seaworthy boat over a wave of 4,5 meter height looks like.


US Coast Guard training.

DSL in such conditions will be very bad. So innovations here do not justify themselves.

But with the delivery of suspects somewhere, questions begin. Is the "anti-piracy ship" equipped with a prison? This is not an idle question, the number of those arrested may exceed twenty people. To kill them in the same way as they did with the gang that seized the "Moscow University"? This should not be done all the time - this is very bad for the country's image, and, even more important, for the morale of the personnel. And it's not a fact that, for example, arms smugglers should immediately go to feed the fish, any person should have the right to a fair trial. Or at least some. Due to the small size of the patrol vessel, the possibility of having a full-fledged prison block on it is extremely doubtful.

The patrol vessel can beat off a pirate attack with its cannon and machine guns, there are no questions here. To conduct an operation in the image and likeness of the liberation of the “Moscow University”, too - there is a helicopter for fire suppression, there are boats.

But with the release of hostages everything is bad.

The fact is that the combination of the height of the board and the speed of the vessel captured by the pirates may prevent them from disembarking from the boats. And then there will be one way - landing from a helicopter. But such a landing should either occur at the poorly guarded tip of the vessel, where the helicopter will not be immediately shot by pirates, or take place under fire cover.

The speed with which the hostage operations should be carried out does not leave a chance for the first option - such penetration into the ship will be too slow. There will be only one option - while the pirates are being crushed by fire from one helicopter, the second immediately, in a matter of seconds, the anti-terrorist unit disembarks, which, preventing the pirates from recovering themselves, destroys them at full speed, moving to the intended location of the hostages. Then the helicopters change, and the second helicopter is landing, while the first one “insures” it from above.

And here our patrol is useless - there is only one helicopter on it. And this is a serious disadvantage, given that right now the pirate threat is changing to a terrorist one, and very quickly. Since 2014, when the “ingenious” decision to build these “ships” was made in the Russian Federation, the number of attacks by pirates in the sea has seriously decreased, while the strength of terrorist groups, their technical equipment, and the training of combat units, on the contrary, have increased. And to solve this problem, a completely different force is needed, rather than a pair of marine units, even from contract soldiers.

With the rescue of people at the patrol, too, "not very" - where on a small vessel to place the crew of a ship set on fire or undermined by pirates? And how to make a surgical operation to a wounded hostage or a fighter in a storm that has begun?

What should be a modern ship adequate to the tasks of ensuring the safety of navigation against piracy and terrorism? It should provide for the basing of a pair of Ka-27PS / 29 helicopters, with the possibility of their simultaneous rise into the air, there should be the possibility of launching a pair of seaworthy boats capable of lifting soldiers by separation. On board there should be not only a gym and a bathhouse, but also a gunsmith for storing various types of weapons and equipment (for example, shields for entering doorways during an assault, large-caliber rifles with a caliber of 12,7 mm, special carbines of the KS-23 type for breaking doors, and firing non-lethal ammunition, various silent pistols and machine guns for different conditions of combat use), with opportunities for minor repairs, a medical unit in which a complex operation could be carried out to a wounded soldier or hostage, a prison for delivering captured pirates to the shore, additional rooms for persons rescued from sinking or burning ships capable of accommodating the crew of an average tanker or bulk carrier). There should be a morgue on it - alas, anything can happen.

A special unit on board should, at the maximum, be equal to four squads - one for each helicopter and boat. One of them must be trained as combat swimmers, and the ship must have the equipment they need - space for storing rebreathers and scuba gear, for refueling scuba gear with breathing mixture, etc.

Dimensions, hull lines and displacement of such a ship should allow helicopters to be raised into the air under conditions typical of the Indian Ocean and North Atlantic.

Need drones for reconnaissance. Naturally, you need a weapon that allows you to fire at targets attacking the ship from any course, preferably remote-controlled machine guns of 14,5 mm caliber with television sights, for day and night use. Naturally, the sectors of their shelling should overlap. As the main caliber, a 76 mm gun will do.

It may be worthwhile to have small-sized ground vehicles for special operations on the coast - for example, motorcycles, ATVs or buggies that a helicopter could bring to the shore on an external sling.

It is clear that to have many such ships would be irrational and expensive, so Russia should finally go for the legalization of PMCs, so that such organizations could take over the security of merchant ships, and legally cooperate in this field with the fleet, which would allow no more than one special "anti-piracy" ship in combat service at any given time. Then there could be no more than four for the entire Navy.

In the course of the war with a real enemy, such a ship could be used as a network and minelayer, in addition, it should be provided with retrofitting with anti-aircraft weapons and conversion into military transport.

It is not difficult to see that the ship of the 22160 project is very far from these requirements, as well as the idea of ​​fighting pirates with one boat of one helicopter and a couple of marine units, and still well, if not enlisted.

But the fleet is building exactly 22160, which, by their anti-piracy functionality, are simply poor.

But maybe then these ships and other functions will be able to perform? No, they can not. The ship cannot protect merchant and transport ships - if only because submarines or aircraft will strike them, and this technology miracle cannot be used with them, in the case of submarines there is even nothing to hear, there is no sonar equipment (except anti-sabotage) nor anti-submarine weapons. And even if the towed GAS “Minotaur” takes place in the compartment of modular equipment, the question remains with the weapon. A helicopter cannot be in the air forever. In the case of an air attack, the crew will have an excellent opportunity to see its death - there is nothing for this aircraft to shoot down planes, it is so silly to count on the 76 millimeter cannon that you don’t even want to discuss it - experienced pilots will try to enter the stern where this ship doesn’t have weapons in general. However, in the case of a strike on a patrol ship of the 22160 project, you can simply drop a guided bomb from a great height.

Similarly, to protect the naval bases with the help of these ships also fail, for the same reasons - they are “deaf” and unarmed.

Against this background, even the fetish of domestic shipbuilders is a modular weapon, it does not look. What is the use of having a container-launcher launcher with Uran missiles, for example, if aviation and submarines are now the main means of attacking ships? To even the container with the missiles was drowned? In principle, domestic shipbuilders and in such logic, probably, can already be reproached, but to the military something to drown on these "edinichka", where are they looking?

As a result, for the ship, in fact, there remains only one reasonable application - to carry in itself the modular PU “Caliber” for striking ground targets. But then it was necessary to put the same container on the landing craft - the same thing, and the price is less at times, and there is more confusion. The landing craft can at least land the landing ...

And, most importantly, with rocket modules - they are not there yet. No serial rocket module. The experience of Americans with modules for LCS says that the list of modules in the series usually “ripens” by the time when the head carrier of these modules should already be deducted from old service. There is a trend. Someone thinks that we can work out a modular theme better than they?

These ships are also miserable from a constructive point of view. So, for example, the stern slip, the one from which the descent of DSL is to occur on the water, is not suitable for solving practical problems. Let's compare the slip on our ship and its analogue, made by Damen.

Ours - visible narrow hatch under the compartment of modular weapons and equipment.





Dutch.



As you can see, the Dutch have a height significantly higher. Why is that? Because in the pursuit of the deployment of modular weapons, domestic designers had to “slaughter” this very height. Where it leads?

This will lead to the fact that on a typical wave for the Arabian Sea (east of the Gulf of Aden), a boat entering a slip will be hit by a wave - the pitching amplitude of the boat at the moment it is dragged onto the ship can be quite large, and it is necessary that there is headroom for this pitching. But he is not, at all. This is another reason why you will have to give up playing games with DSL. But I want the engineers who invented this miracle to ask the question - what did they think when they invented it?

Naturally, the unsuccessful design of the feed slip is not limited to everything.

The patrol ship was built according to "civil" technical requirements. It does not provide for such redundancy of systems that a warship should have, solutions for survivability have not been implemented in the proper volume. For example, both diesels are in the same engine room, and if the engine room is hit by enemy fire or in the event of a fire, the ship will lose speed immediately. In response, one can argue that the ship is not a combat one, but a patrol ship, but isn't it too bold, with the beginning of the Ukrainian events, after the Crimea, after the West began to spin the sanctions flywheel, build a series of non-combat patrol ships? Maybe it would be better to build combat ones?

The question is not idle. According to a source in the Ministry of Defense, the price of one patrol ship of the 22160 project is approximately six billion rubles. The six ships of the first series are thirty-six billion, that is, approximately two corvettes of the 20380 project.

But the 20380 Corvette is “quite another thing,” such a ship can sink patrol boats until the ammunition runs out, not very well, but can fight with submarines, shoot down planes and missiles, can fire its 100 millimeter gun to effectively support fire landing party This is just a full-fledged warship. And, evil irony, just two corvettes are not enough for the Pacific Fleet to get a full-fledged brigade of surface ships from six (and not four) ships of this class by about 2021. In the light of the sharp increase in Japan in this theater of operations, it would not be superfluous.

But instead there will be ships of the 22160 project that you can’t fight with pirates, or take part in hostilities.

Limited to new ships can be used for special operations. Long range, the presence on board of a helicopter, as many as three boats, places for mounting a container with diving equipment, gives some possibilities. But these opportunities do not justify the construction of a whole series of ships of six billion to the detriment of the construction of real warships, albeit in smaller quantities.

Soon all the patrolmen will be commissioned, and the Navy will be faced with the task of inventing their use. Exactly. After all, these ships are like suitcases without a handle. Carry inconvenient quit sorry. Nothing to do, will have to "carry."

There are already ideas - for example, to use patrolmen to guard the Nord Stream pipeline from sabotage. Anti-sabotage gas and grenade launchers that can hit combat swimmers may be the way. But here they are just redundant and too expensive, such a task could be solved much cheaper. There is an idea to re-equip them with rocket weapons, turning them into an overgrown IRA, a sort of “Karakurt”, but huge with a helicopter. However, the zero survivability of these ships will not effectively use them in combat ...

Actually do with these ships is what. To rebuild the stern part, to make a normal slip by eliminating the compartment for modular weapons and equipment, and to transfer ships that have already been built or are in a high degree of readiness to the FSB BOCHR, and those whose readiness is low, cut to metal. It would be the only correct option, all the rest are half measures. It would be much more profitable for the fleet to pay a penalty for breaking a contract than to accept these “things in themselves” that simply have nothing to use.

After all, these ships are useless precisely as ships, and if you look at the whole, then this project is not just useless, but just harmful, as it reduces the country's defense capability.

First, every ship needs a ship commander and CU commanders. In this case, the ship we have non-combat and useless, but the officers and midshipmen will have to put real ones on it. In the event of war, they will die without meaning and result. In peacetime, there will be a ballast, whose professional skills do not grow, due to the lack of tasks for ships that they can fully solve. This is a minus to combat capability, not "zero."

And, of course, the money that will be spent on the operation of these pseudo-ships could be spent, for example, on repairing a ship with a non-zero combat value. But it will be the opposite, and this is also a minus to the defense.

Well, if during the war these ships receive tasks “like real”, then, failing them (and it’s almost impossible), they can put some combat operation “in jeopardy”. This is also not useful for the country.

Such a project received a start in life when Admiral Viktor Chirkov, Commander-in-Chief of the Navy, was in existence. Chirkov is no longer in the fleet, but the ships remain, and it is not clear what to do with them.

However, this is with a conscious shipbuilding policy, we have problems, but with the scattering of money for the wind, we have not had any problems.

One can only hope that the future reduction of military budgets will stop this orgy. Because otherwise it can be stopped by some adversary who considered that the Russian naval tent gives him the opportunity to act from a position of strength. And this option is more and more likely every day.
  • Alexander Timokhin
  • US Department of Defense, Indian Navy, Damen, Curious / forums.airbase.ru, Singapore Navy, US Coast guard, UKRMS, Spanish Navy, Malaysian Navy, Netherlands AIFF, Artyom Balabin
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

323 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +35
    19 December 2018 05: 26
    To put it mildly, a very peculiar ship for the Navy - no weapons, no seaworthiness ... The border ship for the FSB, but then too big for the Black Sea and too weak for the Pacific Ocean ... The ice class for the North is not enough, but for the Marquise Puddle .. not even funny. There are no more cases like how to drive pirates in the Gulf of Aden?
    1. +14
      19 December 2018 05: 53
      Sailors really can’t decide whether they need aircraft carriers or patrol ships. what
      In the end, this is all taxpayer money and it is time to clearly know what we need on the sea and oceans now.
      1. +7
        19 December 2018 06: 32
        Quote: The same LYOKHA
        In the end, it's all taxpayer money

        And this money is not badly piled ...
        1. +1
          19 December 2018 07: 46
          Here yesterday the article was about one more "achievement" of the Navy - launched ̶ ̶sh̶l̶yu̶h̶o̶v̶o̶z̶k̶u̶ the so-called "communications ship" .... Och-ch-chen "necessary" ship .... wink
          1. +43
            19 December 2018 07: 47
            Quote: Snail N9
            Here yesterday the article was about another "achievement" of the Navy

            And here the sofa admiral theorists pulled themselves together. Snail, and you like to muddy the Russian fleet. Anyway.
            Alexander Timokhin for the article from me plus. I respect the position of the author, while I disagree with a number of provisions of the article. I'll start in order.
            According to the official classification, this "patrol ship" was originally planned to "scare pirates" in a known area (so as not to drive more expensive ones like 1155 and 11540 there). Now (in the light of the changed geopolitics) he is charged (retroactively) with somewhat different tasks. 22160 can be used as support ships for our special operations forces in the DMZ, not in border countries, where the Raptor and BK-16 cannot be reached.
            1. Radar stealth (stealth technology of the hull), because to fight pirates on motorboats, this is a show-off, but at night a jerk to approach the shore with weak border control, go into territorial waters, drop off / pick up a group - that's it.
            2. High speed of the ship itself. Moreover, the ability to maintain maximum speed for a long time (according to the chief designer of the ship in the movie military acceptance). Why to fight against pirates on boats for a long period (day, two) rush at maximum speed?
            3. A regular landing assault boat with a ramp in its nose for landing on shore, but absolutely unnecessary in the open sea for assaulting a ship captured by pirates. Why to fight against pirates, a high-speed means of delivering a sabotage and reconnaissance group to an unequipped coast?
            4. A very large, even for a large combat NK, in terms of size and capabilities medical unit at Ave. 22160. With the ability to have as many 2 operating tables. There is also a large sports hall with a basketball court, on which fighters of special operations forces can train.
            Here is such a cruise yacht with a gun in the military style (autonomy of 60 days). You can go to tuna, crab and pirate.
            About the remark of the author of the article
            And, evil irony, just the two corvettes are not enough for the Pacific Fleet to get around the 2021 year a full-fledged brigade of surface ships of six (rather than four) ships of this class.
            I can say that 2 corvettes of project 20385 and 2 corvettes of project 20380 are being built for the Pacific Fleet. At the same time, a corvette of project 20380 "Perfect" has already been commissioned and a similar corvette "Loud" is completing state tests. Thus, the Pacific Fleet receives 6 corvettes.
            1. +2
              19 December 2018 08: 38
              6 corvettes pr 20380 and 2 pr 20385 total 8 will be built on the Pacific Fleet. And pr 22160 for the use of MTR seems to be built
              1. +3
                19 December 2018 09: 17
                In general, only 4 pr. 20380, and that only 6 in all ...
            2. -6
              19 December 2018 08: 41
              The qualities of the new construction that you have listed will not allow you to ensure the operational activities of the RPKSN. They will not at least threaten the surface carriers of the Tomahawks. They will not allow threatening NATO communications in the ocean.
            3. +9
              19 December 2018 08: 54
              Quote: Aristarkh Ludwigovich
              however, with a number of provisions of the article I do not agree.

              Add also "low seaworthiness", as if Somali pirates in a storm on ocean-going ships are going to work, but ours suddenly cannot. request
              1. -5
                19 December 2018 10: 29
                - as if the Somali pirates in the storm on ocean ships go to business, -

                Somali pirates do not have operational capabilities to threaten strategic nuclear forces in the North Atlantic and the Pacific Ocean.
                1. +6
                  19 December 2018 11: 17
                  Quote: gunnerminer
                  Somali pirates do not have operational capabilities to threaten strategic nuclear forces in the North Atlantic and the Pacific Ocean.

                  Yes you are sir captain evidence. Write escho!
                  1. -4
                    19 December 2018 13: 46
                    This ship is a necessary measure that determines the drying up capabilities of the USC. For the main task of the Russian Navy - to ensure the combat readiness of the strategic nuclear forces, this project is not suitable.
              2. +7
                19 December 2018 11: 25
                There is another question. Somalis can afford to survive the week-long bumpiness - they then just unarmed Filipinos scare.

                And after our weekly bumpiness, we will have to fight the pirates, and, most importantly, there are risks that someone will have to undergo a surgical operation in a storm. Initial restrictions are different, you read the article carefully.
                1. +18
                  19 December 2018 13: 34
                  Quote: timokhin-aa
                  There is another question. Somalis can afford to survive the week-long bumpiness - they then just unarmed Filipinos scare.


                  Why do you think that during storms, when the wave (as you described) is from 3 to 6 meters, the "patrolman" will be in the sea? What should he do there in such weather, because everyone (including you, I hope) understands that with such excitement, approach the side of a large ship on this

                  absolutely impossible. Moreover, to board this ship and seize the ship. And therefore, the uterus-ships of the pirates will also not go to sea in such weather. NO ONE wants to hang out at sea for 3-6 points for a week just like that, without a goal. In my opinion, you yourself came up with an absolutely absurd task.
              3. +9
                19 December 2018 13: 26
                Quote: Vladimirets
                Add also "low seaworthiness", as if Somali pirates in a storm on ocean-going ships are going to work, but ours suddenly cannot.

                The ambush is that Somalis will ride out the storm on the shore. But our patrol officer will have to withstand it at sea.
                By the way, EMNIP uv. mina wrote that 22160 had problems with seaworthiness - due to the fact that there was a restriction on displacement in the TK.
                1. +2
                  20 December 2018 16: 00
                  Alexey
                  [quoteAn ambush is that Somalis will ride out the storm on the shore. But our patrol officer will have to withstand it at sea.] [/ Quote]
                  Why not in the bay? Who in Somalia should we ask permission to enter the terr. water?
                  1. +3
                    22 December 2018 03: 13
                    Quote: Sergey Mikhailovich Karasev
                    Who in Somalia should we ask permission to enter the terr. water?

                    Yes, for God's sake - those who want to get ATGMs or mortar mines from the shore can safely go into local bays.
                    1. -1
                      22 December 2018 16: 18
                      Yes, for God's sake - those who want to get ATGMs or mortar mines from the shore can safely go into local bays.

                      Those. preliminary coast reconnaissance has already been abolished? Or will the ship's commander necessarily be degenerate?
                      1. +2
                        22 December 2018 21: 53
                        Quote: Sergey Mikhailovich Karasev
                        Those. preliminary coast reconnaissance has already been abolished? Or will the ship's commander necessarily be degenerate?

                        So in those parts, not preliminary reconnaissance is needed, but the constant protection of a temporary base. Because in the minds of the local population, the most active part of which (due to the storm set in the initial conditions) is also located on the shore, the idea may well come to go for zipuns or hostages. Or just a bullet through the impudent snowballs from the shore.
                        Or even worse, the troops of the local field commander will be declared, demanding to pay for entry into the terrorist water. And these guys can have anything - from Toyota with recoilless tanks to tanks and MLRS.
                      2. 0
                        23 December 2018 01: 17
                        It is unlikely to risk contacting. You can pick up very notably, a possible bakshish is unlikely to compensate for the very likely trends.
                      3. 0
                        25 December 2018 13: 03
                        Forgive the amateur. but why do you cut a good ship ovra tasks to work in DMZ. that he didn’t rest against a stump. and with what he can’t cope with his displacement and armament.
            4. +9
              19 December 2018 09: 17
              Quote: Aristarkh Ludwigovich
              You can go to tuna, crab and pirate.

              You can of course, but those that are only inherent - you can and should immediately redo the PLO-PVO corvette and that's it! Shove calm + GAS + spinner = good OVR corvette. and there are 4 of those from the series, and the first two let them drive pirates or for the MTR ... ...
              1. +13
                19 December 2018 09: 42
                There measures for survivability are not implemented, two diesel engines side by side, calm will not climb there, this is not only PU.
                Gus will deprive this miracle of speed. Etc.

                Suitcase without a handle and drank gos.deneg.
                1. 0
                  20 December 2018 17: 17
                  When the project began to be built, they immediately said that these ships should unload the main forces of the fleet from the fight against pirates. But Kuzyu is not very right to drive. But no, all theorists immediately realized that there was no air defense - PLO - GAS - RCC - ICBM ... and yet he could not chop the cabbage.
                  We have problems with the fleet because we are trying to put the heavy cruiser’s arms on a corvette, and then they wrinkle their foreheads, why seaworthiness is not comme il faut.
                  I think this will be the most sought-after fleet ship in peacetime. But in the war, it’s not for us to compete with the US and NATO fleets. Slightly different weight categories.
              2. +3
                19 December 2018 10: 30
                -PLO-air defense redo and all! -

                Given the pace of construction of USC enterprises, this restructuring will take more than one month.
                1. +1
                  19 December 2018 11: 46
                  Quote: gunnerminer
                  Given the pace of construction of USC enterprises, this restructuring will take more than one month.

                  Yes, at least a year or two ... .. you would only have the opportunity to remake it into a full corvette!
                  1. -2
                    19 December 2018 12: 16
                    Logistics and infrastructure, in order to ensure the established weapons and armaments, cannot be redone in a few years.
                    1. 0
                      19 December 2018 12: 22
                      Logistics [/ quote]
                      which side? or no roads?
                      [quote = gunnerminer] and infrastructure, to provide authorized weapons and
                      weapons can not be redone and for several years [/ quote]
                      there are no ships armed with Calm at the Black Sea Fleet? for neither there is, but for this there will not be - where is the logic?
                      1. -1
                        19 December 2018 13: 48
                        -This side? or no roads? -

                        Logistics is not only expensive.

                        - There are no ships armed with Calm on the Black Sea Fleet? -

                        For ships there is no ATGM and floating depots. There is not enough, at least for peacetime, infrastructure providing ships and crews of the CPF with ammunition.
                  2. -1
                    19 December 2018 12: 18
                    After installing the new modules, according to the design bureau of the NK (the course of combat training of surface ships), you will have to re-take all the tasks of the course. For crew admission. In view of the change in the project. This is at least six months.
            5. +6
              19 December 2018 09: 27
              22160 can be used as ships to ensure the actions of our special operations forces in the DMZ, not in bordering countries, where you can not reach the Raptor and BK-16.


              I wrote about the special operations, but this is generally speaking wasteful - a series of such ships for special operations. There is Ivan Gren, there are two helicopters on it, volumes for people and MTO stocks. Plus MTRs around the world operate from submarines, as from a carrier, providing greater secrecy.

              That is, to resolve the issue with the infiltration of special forces in any Ghana could not even build new ships.

              but at night, with a jerk, approaching the coast with weak border control, entering the territorial waters, disembarking / picking up the group is the very thing.


              And if from a rusty T-55 projectile arrives on board? Visually induced?
              Why this acrobatics, if there is a helicopter and the same DSL? It's too much.

              4. A very large, even for a large combat NK, in size and capabilities of the medical unit at 22160 Ave.


              Have you seen the video with the helicopter? The ship on it has about the same displacement as the 22160. How on such a wave to do the operation? No

              And this I have not brought here discussions among shipbuilders about absenteeism at maximum speed, problems with seaworthiness and range, etc. things not confirmed yet.
              1. +2
                19 December 2018 12: 53
                Quote: timokhin-aa
                And if from a rusty T-55 projectile arrives on board? Visually induced?

                With proper planning, this can not be. The forces of special operations, as a rule, operate secretly, carefully choosing the place and time of the operation. And if there are problems with planning, then you can allow anything.
                1. -1
                  19 December 2018 13: 50
                  -The forces of special operations usually act covertly, carefully choosing the place and time of the operation. -

                  This ship is not enough for the MTR. Only if it is against an untrained counter, which has only bows, arrows and slings.
                2. +7
                  19 December 2018 15: 58
                  Aristarkh Lyudvigovich
                  I, too, am trying to understand the train of thought of the leaders of the fleet, the army and higher, but each time it is more and more alarming. I hope, nevertheless, in a couple of years we will rejoice in the presence of these unconditionally beautiful ships with full awareness of their need.
                  However, regarding your words, I want to comment on my current point of view. Of course, I understand everything, but with the actual absence of a fleet (I hope you will not argue), build SIX ships for MTR...
                  It is not serious to discuss outside the walls of special medical institutions request
            6. +6
              19 December 2018 10: 00
              Quote: Aristarkh Ludwigovich

              And here the sofa admiral theorists pulled themselves together. Snail, and you like to muddy the Russian fleet. Anyway.

              I don't want to throw mud at the fleet. I am simply, as a person very far from the navy, I am wondering - and what kind of trough is this "communications ship"? Should I carry dispatches?
              And, it seems understood - a written order. Those. an order with a signature and a seal? Did I understand correctly?
              1. +1
                19 December 2018 13: 12
                Quote: Krasnoyarsk
                and what kind of trough is this - "communication ship"? Should I carry dispatches?

                Its land analogue is KShM (Command Post Machine). The boat can be used as a remote control point for the fleet commander, for which it has the appropriate equipment.
                1. -1
                  19 December 2018 13: 50
                  - The boat can be used as a remote control point for the fleet commander, for which it has the appropriate equipment.

                  It can’t. It does not have an uninterruptible power supply. And the batteries will quickly die.
                  1. +1
                    20 December 2018 10: 55
                    Quote: gunnerminer
                    It can’t. It does not have an uninterruptible power supply. And the batteries will quickly die.

                    It’s just that your oars don’t have it. fool
                    1. -1
                      20 December 2018 12: 32
                      It’s measured like a chovny.
              2. +9
                19 December 2018 14: 14
                In order to understand what a communications ship is, type in the search engine the abbreviation CER or read Oleg Rykov's book "Charlie-Charlie-Bravo" at your leisure.
                PS Eh ... I once saw Ural live, a very impressive spectacle, comparable, perhaps, with 941 projects.
              3. +2
                21 December 2018 10: 54
                Krasnoyarsk: why are communication ships needed, justification was also given by Sergey Pavlovich Korolev. Since then, the range of tasks of these ships has only expanded.
            7. 0
              19 December 2018 11: 42
              No, in calm weather, in the depths of the Gulf of Aden, everything will be fine. But it is somehow strange to rely on the fact that you are lucky with the weather and the enemy (pirates) will not wield where we cannot act. Especially since in fact he is wielding there.

              add to yours ---- maybe Sechin ordered for protection, they will be driven to Venezuela? and South Whale Sea and Srediz Sea.? to protect tankers and gas carriers?
              + sabotage + modular gauges?
              in short - do not tell the truth before the start of TrMV
            8. +1
              20 December 2018 11: 13
              I completely agree with the author of the comment.
              I would like to add:
              1. There is a difference between the FSB ship and the Navy ship, the warship and the enemies are mainly assumed to be military. For example, look at the passage of Ukrainian ships through the strait. Only the fires of the Navy could stop the combat boats. I do not think that the FSB officers went on the assault on the boats if they returned fire. Most likely they would have called specialists from the Navy.
              2. The main (current) theater of active military events is the Black and Mediterranean Sea. We look where these ships will be sent to - in the World Cup. And on the Mediterranean Sea it’s not the Atlantic or the Pacific Ocean, it’s calmer here, but there is enough task. Including escort of our cargo ships to Syria and the landing of saboteurs on an unequipped coast. Yes, and there are enough other tasks
          2. -1
            19 December 2018 08: 14
            About the "communication ship" -sh .... the carriage is not the ship "Marshal Krylov"? ..... So type in the search engine TOGE-4,5 .... There is no secret, the truth is written ..... .. why, why and when ICBMs were launched to the maximum range in the Pacific Ocean test range .... now they are shooting at Kamchatka ..... yes, they hit .... but how far the missile will deliver the BG-It is impossible to find out, only on paper -computer calculations.
            1. +2
              19 December 2018 08: 23
              Quote: GTYCBJYTH2021
              About the "communication ship" -sh .... the carriage is not the ship "Marshal Krylov"? ..... So type in the search engine TOGE-4,5 .... There is no secret, the truth is written ..... .. why, why and when ICBMs were launched to the maximum range in the Pacific Ocean test range .... now they are shooting at Kamchatka ..... yes, they hit .... but how far the missile will deliver the BG-It is impossible to find out, only on paper -computer calculations.

              No, this is the Snail on the communication boat KSV-2168 of the project 1388NZ crumbles a loaf. The boat was built by Sokol Shipyard OJSC (Nizhny Novgorod Region) and launched on October 27 on October 2017. In the USA, for example, for the commander of the 6 fleet, there is a “Mount Whitney” - a control ship with a displacement of 18400 tons. The control ship provides communications, work and living quarters for the fleet commander and his subordinates, and serves to coordinate the activities of the fleet. But Snailman prays for the Americans, when the site had flags, his avatar was with the US flag. But pouring mud on the Russian fleet is a completely different matter.
              1. +9
                19 December 2018 09: 47
                Mount Whitney - has an appointment and is very real.

                This ship has an appointment in the convenient delivery of VIP persons to the area of ​​the review / to the inspected object. It is even written in the official booklet. There, by the way, the means of communication are listed - they are not at all impressive by the way.
                1. 0
                  20 December 2018 17: 07
                  We must look at what is included in the R-760. Anything can be there. In general, I agree, a yacht for VIP persons.
              2. +5
                19 December 2018 12: 50
                Quote: Aristarkh Ludwigovich
                No, it’s Ulitnik on the communications boat KSV-2168 of project 1388NZ crumbles a loaf.

                And I will crumble. How will these yachtsmen fight off the adversary?
                1. -3
                  19 December 2018 13: 07
                  He did not have weapons, a land analogue of the KShM (Command and Staff Machine). The boat can be used as a remote control point for the fleet commander, for which it has the appropriate equipment. There, in the picture above at the stern of the "ball" of satellite communications, yes 3 antennas for VHF communications ... 24 comfortable cabins. In the old days, the king was even cooler.
                  1. +2
                    19 December 2018 13: 23
                    Standard had 8 guns.
                2. +2
                  20 December 2018 13: 08
                  and I will crumble. How will these yachtsmen fight off the adversary?

                  From a distance, they throw caps with caps, near the cocaine in the eyes, pepper under the tail.
              3. 0
                19 December 2018 14: 13
                Clearly, Aristarchus .......... No offense already .....
        2. 0
          22 December 2018 02: 56
          Something I think that for the phrase about the cut you just need to ban. Buy a saw for yourself and have a drink somewhere. Soothing.
      2. +8
        19 December 2018 09: 36
        You Alexei are right, the sailors cannot decide what they need. It seems that the Russian fleet, like in Ukraine, is commanded by tankmen who do not understand the functions of the Navy and the functions of the maritime border guard. The article is not bad, relevant (although no one will listen to it), but for me a sea man is hard to hear the word "boat", it's as if you are catching squeakers from a boat on the lake, and another photo US Navy Arleigh Burke-class ship dispatches search team to ship suspected of piracy. Here, instead of a pirate ship, there really is an aluminum boat with an Africa motor called "lunch".
        1. +4
          19 December 2018 11: 26
          Yes, I did not look at who Burke caught there, it was important for me to show, a tactical device - two RIBs and a vertotlet.
      3. +2
        19 December 2018 13: 10
        It is possible that the sailors have nothing to do with it, for this you need to know the real owners of the ZZZ, which is building this miracle. It was just that the commander-in-chief could be strongly recommended, but he did not fight, and took him under the hood.
      4. +3
        19 December 2018 22: 29
        Quote: The same LYOKHA
        Sailors really can’t decide what they need, whether aircraft carriers or patrol ships

        the sailors decided what they needed.
        That's just admirals need something else. It turns out that they built a ship that is useless and useless for anything, which does not have ...
        ... no weapons, no seaworthiness ... too big for the Black Sea and too weak for the Pacific ... The ice class is not enough for the North, but for the Marquise Puddle ...

        A disgrace. What are they hoping for when they reach the manger?
        1. +1
          20 December 2018 10: 43
          A disgrace. What are they hoping for when they reach the manger?

          Well, let's look at things taking into account the historical context, so to speak. The ships were planned for construction at a time of great "optimism". In 2013, they were still talking about the construction of two series of frigates and a large series of corvettes. There were no sanctions at that time, there was no break in cooperation ... The plans were huge, they planned, in addition to everything necessary, something else .. As a result, now we see that these plans can be fully fulfilled only in relation to ships "simpler". So it turns out that instead of the ships necessary for the fleet, useless ones are being built.
    2. +6
      19 December 2018 07: 47
      like most komentov.
      in the article they cheated on a good ship, and it seems to me only because of the fact that it would catch up with the government (well, it gives reasons, they would not say that).
      and the ship is just an excuse.
      even when they were laid it was known that they were modular.
      that the purpose will depend on the current modules, and unlike most conventional ships, this ship can easily change its purpose.
      he can be a PLO ship, he has a gas, a helicopter and he can carry PLUR. it can perform the functions of air defense, although it is limited, since it is possible to put Shtil on it. it can be drummers, beat with a caliber for 2.5 thousand km, or by ships for 300km.
      he can inspect ships, can deliver troops.
      its only "minus" is that it is small and therefore this is a ship not of the oceanic zone. so they did not intend to send him to the ocean.
      and in fact the main problem is not in the ship, but in the fact that MO POCA saves on modules.
      1. -2
        19 December 2018 08: 01
        Quote: just explo
        in the article they cheated on a good ship, and it seems to me only because of the fact that it would catch up with the government (well, it gives reasons, they would not say that).

        The author of the article expresses an interesting idea.
        In fact, there is something to do with these ships. Rebuild the stern, make a normal slip due to the liquidation of the compartment for modular weapons and equipment, and transfer the already built or highly prepared ships to the FSB FSB, and those whose readiness is low, cut into metal.

        So, cut ready-made patrolmen alive, and cut those on the slipways. For example, take and cut the corps of 22160 patrolmen under construction at the Zaliv shipyard in the hero city of Kerch. Alexander Tmokhin Are you ready to look into the eyes of the workers of shipyards in Kerch and Zelenodolsk when they will cut ships on slipways?
        1. -1
          19 December 2018 08: 08
          interesting, but he won't offer Su-34 to be cut into metal or to cut bomb bombs and give them to the FSB Bohr, and it is not known why to give them out. but the main thing is that they would not be in the Air Force.
          1. -5
            19 December 2018 08: 17
            Quote: just explo
            interesting, but he won't offer Su-34 to be cut into metal or to cut bomb bombs and give them to the FSB Bohr, and it is not known why to give them out. but the main thing is that they would not be in the Air Force.

            First you need to cut the 22160 patrolmen, and there you look and the SU-34 can be disposed of. They are obsolete and lose to the 5 generation. It is necessary to cut the patrolmen in front of the workers, as farmers in the saints of 90 cut bombers in front of the pilots in Ukraine. So that they stand and cry.
          2. +1
            19 December 2018 09: 22
            what did you only offer the SU-34 for analysis, and let us swipe right away at the TU-160. it's sarcasm, if that.
          3. +5
            19 December 2018 09: 41
            There are no boombags. You'd be better off building something else, eh?
            1. -3
              19 December 2018 11: 34
              Well weapons suspension. not the difference. everyone understood what I had in mind.
              except you .
              1. -1
                19 December 2018 16: 26
                Everyone understood that you have problems with expressing even such simple thoughts.

                In addition, there are also problems with logic - from the desire to cut the keels or the central sections of future under-ships, from which one harm, one should not want to cripple the useful and well-proven aircraft in a real war, this was not my idea, it was the voices in your head ironically.
          4. -3
            19 December 2018 10: 08
            Quote: just explo
            interesting, but he will not offer to cut the Su-34 into metal or cut bomb bombs and give them to the FSB Bohr, and it is not known why to give them out. but the main thing is that they would not be in the air force

            ========
            Thank God!! A. Timokhin so far only the Fleet is "gutting" ... Aviation has not yet "reached" ....
            1. +4
              19 December 2018 11: 27
              Need more unarmed ships! Also remove the gun from them! So Broom will be pleased!
              1. -2
                19 December 2018 11: 34
                yes yes, a ship with Calm and KR, PLUR, RCC, real unarmed ship.
                1. +1
                  19 December 2018 16: 27
                  There is no Calm there and never will be. And PLUR never will.

                  Calibers may appear, but it is nonsense to build such a barn just for their sake.
                2. +1
                  20 December 2018 00: 33
                  You forgot "or, or, or",
                  where are these modules with Calm, KR, PLUR, RCC?
              2. +5
                19 December 2018 13: 10
                Quote: timokhin-aa
                Need more unarmed ships! Also remove the gun from them! So Broom will be pleased!

                =========
                "Broom" (unlike you, dear) - knows how think и analyze!!! Work like that! request
                А WHAT do you know about project 22160 ??? Only what is PUBLISHED ??? Just what PUBLISHED (in the open press) ??? Are you sure that they showed / informed you - EVERYTHING?? Self confidence, worthy - "best use" !!! And there too !!!
                But we know about this project at the same time LOTS and LITTLE !!!
                "Unarmed" ship ??? Oh well!!! You were just shown a "patrol" version of "peacetime" !!! And you - and "swallowed! Didn't even think about it - WHAT FOR there is a radar station "Positive-MK" !!! ( request ) ..... And this, by the way - MULTIFUNCTIONAL Radar, optimized to work with a powerful BIUS (by the way - we DON'T KNOW what kind of BIUS is installed there!) And the issuance of target designation for air defense systems, anti-missile systems and work "in a group" ..... WHY is it needed on a ship "almost unarmed"? ??) Just the "stupidity" of the admirals and the "cut" of the budget ??? Isn't it too simple ??? A similar thesis will do for an angry "mediocrity" .... And if you THINK ??? What if To think - this provides for the installation of WHERE MORE POWERFUL weapons !!! And not only "Caliber" or "Uranov" ..... She and "Calm" and "Pantsyr-M" can provide target designation ...
                As for the GAS - it really is not there ..... But WHO told you that there is no provision for installing a "keel" GAS ?? Or you yourself - "hit upon it" ???
                Before writing such an "opus" - you need VERY WELL know the design of the ship and its capabilities .... Otherwise, from "under your pen" will come out - "what happened" !!! hi
                1. 0
                  19 December 2018 13: 39
                  Gus is there.
                  1. +2
                    19 December 2018 16: 29
                    Anti-sabotage.
                2. -1
                  19 December 2018 16: 28
                  WHAT do you know about the 22160 project ??? ONLY THAT POSTED ???


                  Well, let's say - much more than I write in the press. Just not everything can be spread on the 'Net.

                  Everything else is your wet dreams and nothing more.
        2. +12
          19 December 2018 09: 35
          I looked at people and under more dramatic circumstances, it happened.
          Not broken.

          Let me ask you - do you agree that your children would die on this ship, in conditions when a real war began, and this shell was sent into battle? Moreover, we will complicate the introductory - you now know that they could be on a normal warship, and would have survived (or had chances).
          Are you satisfied with this situation?
          1. +1
            19 December 2018 11: 20
            Quote: timokhin-aa
            Let me ask you - do you agree that your children would die on this ship, in conditions when a real war began, and this shell was sent into battle? Moreover, we will complicate the introductory - you now know that they could be on a normal warship, and would have survived (or had chances).

            According to your patrolman of project 22160, you will have to confront the aviation, frigates, submarines of NATO countries alone, and maybe all together at once, and maybe even the AUG. So after all, the fleets of NATO countries and several missile cruisers of Project 1144 "Orlan" with TAVKR "Admiral Kuznetsov" can be crushed without any problems if they want.
            1. +9
              19 December 2018 11: 30
              We'll have to confront. The Black Sea Fleet is currently on the move with three frigates and two old TFRs, one of which has been launched in 1967, and which does not have a missile system (and will never function).

              The 22160 project goes to the Black Sea Fleet, to the Novorossiysk naval base, to the OVR brigade. During the war, the OVR brigade will be cut into quite specific tasks of the OVR brigade.

              Throwing ships from other fleets there will not work - the enemy dominates the lines of sea communications.

              Naval aviation fleet ditched.

              Further logic allows you to continue?
              1. 0
                19 December 2018 11: 35
                and logic knows the "word" (abbreviation) PBRK?
              2. -2
                19 December 2018 12: 56
                Quote: timokhin-aa
                Have to confront.

                By your logic, against a miserable multipurpose aircraft carrier group a whole patrol ship with a tonnage of 1300 will not pull - obviously drank it! The submarine sank (God forbid, of course). You would have guarded the Admiral Kuznetsov and sent a couple of cruisers, and then a war. A couple, the 22160 troika would block the area and, if necessary, take part in the rescue operation, having special equipment on board. Which was installed on it BEFORE EXIT on a task. MO has no complaints. The Russian Navy ordered the project, but you have a complaint ...
                1. +4
                  19 December 2018 18: 31
                  Submarine sank (God forbid, of course) You would have sent Admiral Kuznetsov and a couple of cruisers to guard, and suddenly a war. A couple, a troop of 22160 would block the area and, if necessary, participate in the rescue operation, having special equipment on board.


                  Do you visualize a rescue ship for a submarine? Stop putting the owl on the globe. The production line of the democmpression will not even fit into the entire 22160 series, if they are welded to each other, and it certainly cannot be “installed before leaving” on this shell.
              3. -8
                19 December 2018 13: 52
                Quote: timokhin-aa
                It will not work to transfer ships from other fleets there - the enemy dominates the lines of sea lanes. The fleet ditched naval aviation. Further logic allows you to continue?

                ========

                It would be better, of course WITHOUT HYSTERIC !!!
            2. The comment was deleted.
          2. +3
            19 December 2018 13: 48
            Quote: timokhin-aa
            I looked at people and under more dramatic circumstances, it happened.
            Not broken.

            =========
            Yes you??? LOOKED and "DO NOT BREAK" ??? Excuse me, but you think you are the ONE SUCH ??? Here (on the VO website) I think there is a LOT PEOPLE which are not only "in the eyes" but also in "trunk"dropped in !!! And"DO NOT BREAK"!!! You need to be more modest !!! Modest !!! negative
            1. +4
              19 December 2018 16: 30
              You would be more careful with a kapslok something. Well, as the Soviet psychiatry back? After all, you immediately calculate laughing
        3. -2
          19 December 2018 10: 18
          Quote: Aristarkh Ludwigovich
          The author of the article expresses an interesting idea.
          In fact, there is something to do with these ships. Rebuild the stern, make a normal slip by eliminating the compartment for modular weapons and equipment, and transfer the already built or highly prepared ships to the FSB FSB, and cut those whose readiness is low, cut into metal.

          So, cut ready-made patrolmen alive, and cut those on the slipways. For example, take and cut the corps of 22160 patrolmen under construction at the Zaliv shipyard in the hero city of Kerch. Alexander Tmokhin Are you ready to look into the eyes of the workers of shipyards in Kerch and Zelenodolsk when they will cut ships on slipways?

          ========
          good Maybe simpler than some "authors" "located in high availability"Transfer to the FSB ??? lol laughing
      2. +4
        19 December 2018 09: 20
        it’s very expensive, and it’s stupid when the modules hang out on the shore, not practice, but there are fixed costs, it would be better to build 203 normal corvettes for the Black Sea Fleet
      3. +11
        19 December 2018 09: 33
        he can be a PLO ship, he has a gas, a helicopter and he can carry PLUR. it can perform the functions of air defense, although it is limited, since it is possible to put Shtil on it. it can be drummers, beat with a caliber for 2.5 thousand km, or by ships for 300km.


        It cannot be an PLO ship, an PLO ship is not only a BUGAS in a container, it is also a bulbous one for searching ahead in the direction of travel, it is at least some kind of anti-torpedo protection, this is a power plant depreciation to reduce noise and vibrations, it is an ANTI-SUBSTANCE WEAPON - it is even in a modular form is not provided here. This is a ship's arsenal with torpedoes, which is not here at all, there is nowhere to store them. He cannot carry any PLURs, PLURs are not put into container PUs, and there is no serial container PU, he cannot carry out air defense, because STIL is not only PU, which the cuties are trying to "shove" this ship into the gym (bugaga ), this is also a correspondence. REV, which is not only absent on this ship, but also nowhere to be installed.

        To beat Caliber on 2000 km and the landing craft can, if it is placed on it, as it is written in the article.
        1. -4
          19 December 2018 14: 15
          Quote: timokhin-aa
          It cannot be a PLO ship, a PLO ship is not only a BUGAS in a container, it is also a bulwark for searching ahead in the direction of travel

          =========
          Sorry! Do you consider the ship as a SEPARATELY TAKE UNIT? Are you by any chance "stuck" at the 1905 level ???
          ------
          Quote: timokhin-aa
          it is an anti-boat weapon - it is not even provided for in a modular form.

          ========
          Yah??? And that "Caliber-NK" no longer has anti-submarine missiles (91R) ??? recourse
          1. +3
            19 December 2018 16: 31
            Let's discuss this when they are "entered" into the container PU, okay?
        2. +3
          19 December 2018 18: 21
          I liked your article Alexander, and the attempts to argue your personal point of view in it. But I ask you to forgive me, in it again, I find on your part just some kind of "pathological dislike" for this particular project, and incomprehensible (for me personally) in comparison with it, blind (again, in my opinion) sympathy to pr. 20380 ?! I will try to explain myself. Firstly: I am very far from thinking that the Navy will receive more than three (out of the planned series of six) ships of this project, in this one - "purely anti-piracy" configuration. Already proceeding from the fact that the site "float.com" slipped earlier, and the fact that the ships laid down on the "Zaliv" (in Kerch) are larger than the first ones laid down in 22160, and from the fact that there (albeit modularly) but planned all the same, install both "Calm" and "Caliber" and "GAS - Minotaur". And yes, the presence of "Positive-M" leads to the same thoughts (and not only me, but apparently both "venik" and "just exploit" and probably many others). Secondly: the better 20380, so that if all these modules appear on further (Kerch) 22160 ?! He seems to have something to detect submarines, but nothing to fight with them.! In the end, admit that "Packet-NK" is, in fact, a weapon for repelling a torpedo attack on a ship, nothing more. Not a single submarine will allow a corvette to reach 14-18 km !! At the same time, I have a question for you personally, - Alexander, - "are you sure that it is not possible to put ammunition from anti-submarine missiles of the 91-R family into modular launch containers for the Caliber?" In addition, - "Are you also absolutely sure that the air defense system of the" redoubt "complex at 20380 can provide air defense to the ship at a range of 35-40 km or more, and issue a control center through" Puma "and" Fourke-2 "? Maybe at one time the Navy "swallowed" this apparent failure, so as not to raise a wave of "worried taxpayers", and accepted into the fleet obviously "inferior" corvettes in terms of the previously declared air defense characteristics? corvettes for 17 "lard" passed, and the air defense can only work "in front of the nose" ?! Then you must agree that in the presence of a spent "Calm" with a range of destruction of about 50 (although some swing at 70) km, as well as "Caliber "on further ships of the 22160 series, they will obviously be no worse, and most likely, moreover, they are also cheaper to build than the 20380 corvettes you love so much, but really expensive and" toothless enough "corvettes 22160! I'm afraid to even imagine what would happen if on them (533) later and "adults" XNUMX mm TA they'll find a place later ...
          1. +6
            19 December 2018 18: 38
            "Are you sure that it is not possible to put ammunition from anti-submarine missiles of the 91-R family into modular launch containers for the Caliber?"


            Yes. And even if they were standing there, they have nowhere to give the main command - there is no GAS on the ship, a modular one cannot be installed if there is a missile container.

            "Are you also absolutely sure that the air defense system of the" redoubt "complex at 20380 can provide air defense to a ship at a distance of 35-40 km or more, and issue a control center through" Puma "and" Furke-2 "? What time did the Navy "swallow" this apparent failure, so as not to raise a wave of "worried taxpayers", and accepted into the fleet clearly "defective" corvettes in terms of the previously declared air defense characteristics?


            At one time it was, but now the problem is solved. On the other hand, 22160 does not solve it, there is simply no air defense (MANPADS only), there is nothing to decide with.

            Then you must agree that in the presence of a spent "Calm" with a range of about 50 (although some are aiming at 70) km, as well as "Calibers" on further ships of the 22160 series, they will obviously be no worse


            But who promised you all the calm? Calm needs a corresponding REV, it is physically no place to place it on this ship, PU is also no place to place.
            No Calm on 22160. And never will be.

            they will obviously be no worse, and most likely, moreover, they are also cheaper to build than your beloved, but really expensive and "toothless enough" corvettes 20380


            The "foundation" for the PU of the Package is 11 tons of EMNIP, where the recoil when the torpedo is fired is brutal, the PU support is placed only on the reinforced deck. There is none at 22160. PU can not be put anywhere. Survivability at the level of a civilian vessel. A TA with a caliber of 533 mm can be supplied, but there is no cellar for torpedoes at all.

            Are you kidding me, huh?
          2. +1
            20 December 2018 07: 29
            No need to throw beads before you know who.))
      4. +3
        19 December 2018 09: 52
        "It can deliver troops.
        its only "minus" is that it is small and therefore this is a ship not of the oceanic zone. so they did not intend to send him to the ocean "
        That's all, the dierambs have ended for this undership. If the landing, then no more than half of the platoon, the area of ​​action is coastal, and where you are going to land in the Baltic or the Black Sea, it can only be to dill in the Sea of ​​Azov. Our country enters into different climatic zones and has closed seas and open and oceans, including you can’t build one unified ship for the Caspian Sea, for the Arctic Ocean and for the Black Sea. Of course, as always, there is not enough money, but you can build it on top of a yacht costing an aircraft carrier.
      5. -8
        19 December 2018 10: 01
        Quote: just explo
        in the article cheated a good ship

        ==========
        good drinks I agree!!! The logic of the Naval Command here, it seems to me, is clear - the desire to have an inexpensive universal platform that, in peacetime, can be used as a patrol ship, and if necessary (changing the situation) can be easily and quickly transformed into a specialized ship "sharpened" for execution. specialized "functions (shock, air defense, PLO) ....
        The author would put a huge "minus" (yes, the authors' articles "minus" - it does not work .....) for absolutely surface и one-sided "analysis".
        PS As soon as I read the title of the article - is it possible that A. Timokhin "distinguished himself" ??? I could not resist - looked at the end - WELL, EXACTLY, he, dear !!!
      6. +7
        19 December 2018 11: 36
        Quote: just explo
        and unlike most conventional ships, this ship can easily change its purpose

        1. There are no modules. Let's say for now. Doesn't it seem strange to you that at first 6 media are built, and then "Thinking about Modules" begins?
        2. Are you sure the installation of this new module will be quick and easy? I do not even presume how long it will take this "you can put Calm".
        3. Properly trained personnel for these new modules, where will it come from? Well, for the same air defense, for example?
        The ship turned out to be extremely controversial (I write this because of the prohibition of certain vocabulary in VO).
        1. -2
          19 December 2018 14: 03
          Quote: Ryazanets87
          1. There are no modules. Let's say for now. Doesn't it seem strange to you that at first 6 media are built, and then "Thinking about Modules" begins?

          ==========
          And why, in fact, do you think THEM - NO ??? Well, that's just the "example", here they are Natives:


          It's just that the (International) situation is now such that pulling "sworn" friends "for" Faberge ", on the eve of their predicted release of the INF Treaty, is somehow" not comme il faut "..... And the" Container "" Calibers "are there are "container" ones ... You can put it on a ship ... You can put it on a railway platform ... Or you can load it on a "wagon" in general ... So they are in no hurry ...
          1. +3
            19 December 2018 14: 48
            Quote: venik
            And why, in fact, do you think THEM - NO ???

            Because in the version of the ship module they are not. Your cap.
            Quote: venik
            "Container" "Calibers" - they are "container" ... You can put on a ship ... You can - on a railway platform.

            So yes, it’s not a question: here’s a proof for the air defense module:
          2. 0
            19 December 2018 16: 32
            These are mockup samples if you are not up to date.
        2. -3
          19 December 2018 14: 08
          Quote: Ryazanets87
          Are you sure that installing this module will be quick and easy? I do not even presume how long it will take this "you can put Calm".

          =============
          ARE YOU SURE that it will be LONG, EXPENSIVE and COMPLEX ???? request
          1. +4
            19 December 2018 14: 51
            I am sure that this installation requires a minimum of factory facilities. However, you can see the foreign experience of the same Danes. Although after your previous statements, I somehow doubted the productivity of the discussion.
      7. +8
        19 December 2018 13: 41
        Quote: just explo
        even when they were laid it was known that they were modular.

        But these modules are still not there.
        Quote: just explo
        that the purpose will depend on the current modules, and unlike most conventional ships, this ship can easily change its purpose

        Yeah ... put a new module - and the team looks at him like a ram at a new gate.
        A modular ship needs a modular team. Otherwise, we get a classic wagon that does everything equally badly. Moreover, the training of teams for all modules must be carried out constantly - as on ordinary ships.
        Quote: just EXPL
        it can perform air defense functions, though to a limited extent, since Calm can be placed on it.

        UVP - possible. And where to put antenna posts?
        Quote: just explo
        its only "minus" is that it is small and therefore this is a ship not of the oceanic zone. so they did not intend to send him to the ocean.

        Its only minus is near-zero survivability.
        Quote: just explo
        and in fact the main problem is not in the ship, but in the fact that MO POCA saves on modules

        For the time being? belay The lead ship is already on state ships, and the armament has not even been developed. There is one type of container - diving. And that’s it.
      8. +5
        19 December 2018 22: 32
        Quote: just explo
        can easily change its purpose.

        or maybe not change.
        How is all this being implemented in practice? Here they are. Tomorrow you need to do it PLO. What is needed for this today? It is? Who and how quickly will do it?
    3. -5
      19 December 2018 09: 42
      Quote: LeonidL
      To put it mildly, a very peculiar ship for the Navy - neither weapons, nor seaworthiness ...

      ===========
      About seaworthiness - sure??? According to experts (not designers) - their seaworthiness is just very high for ships of this class (comparable to the much larger frigates of project 11356) !!
    4. 0
      4 February 2019 19: 58
      I think the author is aware that even these vessels were NOT moved. Where will it come from for larger projects?!. MTU?!.?
      1. 0
        5 February 2019 17: 09
        Miracles, however ... people say, the steamboats are on the keel blocks, there are NO engines! People write some kind of canoe .... hi
  2. +3
    19 December 2018 06: 00
    Again, everything is gone. Where to run, whom to call?
    Lord, pay attention to the black deeds of your unreasonable children.
    1. -3
      19 December 2018 07: 37
      but no one noticed that now, as in 2008, all the resources again went through a series of articles saying that everything was gone, everything is bad, and with a hint they say it’s time to go to Nirab and overthrow the government of the patamushta magician, the patamushta wash power.
      Well, in general, all the charms of maydaun.
      1. -8
        19 December 2018 09: 21
        I noticed for a long time ... The articles went different and strange ... The authors quietly pour dirt on Russia .. So quietly, quietly .. Behind the scenes ...
        1. -4
          19 December 2018 11: 36
          and they also have tons of anonymous minusers. at what on all resources.
          1. +1
            20 December 2018 11: 42
            I am the minuser of your delirium!
            According to you only "enemies of the fatherland" are trying to fight bungling and cutting the budget.
            And you "wise men" see right through them.
            Then argue and not mud.
      2. +14
        19 December 2018 09: 36
        We must approve of doing in response to everything, then we will get the Russian-Japanese, we'll beat with blood. Great, isn't it?
        1. -5
          19 December 2018 11: 37
          But where and where in the World Cup will we be distilling squadrons?
          and by the way, even a couple of new frigates will not fix the situation there. but MA and PBRK corrects them very much.
        2. -1
          19 December 2018 14: 06
          Quote: timokhin-aa
          We must approve of doing in response to everything, then we will get the Russian-Japanese, we'll beat with blood. Great, isn't it?

          ========
          No! It's really cool - yelling: "Chef! The truncate is gone! Plaster - they are removing!" Client "- leaving !!!!
          1. +3
            19 December 2018 18: 43
            No Broom. It will be great when your kids are sent to guard the landing party on the transition as part of 22160.

            You will have a great opportunity to pay for the refusal to use the brain, which you, apparently, once made. Genome Broom didn’t pass natural selection, the world was too complicated for him, bgggg.

            It would even be fair, only normal people feel sorry.
          2. +5
            19 December 2018 22: 35
            Quote: venik
            No! It's really cool - yelling: "Chef! The truncate is gone! Plaster - they are removing!" Client "- leaving !!!!

            or maybe you already have to ask for things earthly and water? And then, after all, they will do a business order for promotion. How much are people's money used for its intended purpose?
        3. 0
          20 December 2018 11: 30
          Quote: timokhin-aa
          We must approve of doing in response to everything, then we will get the Russian-Japanese, we'll beat with blood. Great, isn't it?

          No, don't! Simply, the message of the article is aimed not at what "I would like", but at the fact that "nothing is being done"! Both the rearmament plan and the military doctrine are linked not only with the "Wishlist", but also with the state of the economy. Or do you think that the leadership and the military do not want more and better? They want, only the availability of resources does not allow it. Both patriots and liberals will stand in "one system", no matter if there is any bias towards the military budget. Gone are the days when the society adequately treated the slogan - "Everything for the front, everything for victory"!
      3. +9
        19 December 2018 14: 15
        Quote: just explo
        but no one noticed that now, as in 2008, a shaft of articles about the fact that everything was gone, everything went bad again on all resources

        In fact, about 22160 it was written from the very beginning that the order of this ship for the Navy is incomprehensible - almost all of the tasks stated for it belong to the competence of the Bokhr. But this pepelats cannot carry out purely naval tasks, especially in the configuration in which it was ordered by the fleet (I mean the missing place for the bow module).

        And most importantly, order 22160 is incomprehensible against the background of the urgent need to replace the naval MPKs, which were built during the Soviet era. Another five years - and the "albatrosses" of the OVR will begin to be massively written off. And there is no substitute for them.
        1. +1
          19 December 2018 18: 31
          [Quote] [/ And most importantly, the order of 22160 is incomprehensible against the background of the urgent need to replace the naval MPKs, which were built during the Soviet era. Another five years - and the "albatrosses" of the OVR will begin to be massively written off. And there is no replacement for them.quote] The original project 11661 (a project that had a GAS), before its castration to the level of just an MRC, would be quite useful for replacing the Albatross, and was cheaper than the "toothless" and expensive 20380 ...
    2. +13
      19 December 2018 07: 45
      Quote: Chichikov

      Again, everything is gone.
      In this particular case with the ships of the 22160 Ave., everything was really lost.
      1. 0
        25 December 2018 14: 34
        Quote: Chichikov

        Again, everything is gone.
        In this particular case with the ships of the 22160 Ave., everything was really lost.
        Reply


        but let's not become like A. Timokhin (he has no pathological love for "patrolmen", and blind sympathy for 20380), and wait until, well, at least the first two 22160, a year, one and a half, or even two, are like a battle service. Then we will probably see exactly how the Navy planned to use them. Most likely, this is escort convoy (escort) during the passage of merchant (and not only) ships by sea (in the Mediterranean, to Tartus, Algeria, Libya, Yemen, etc., for which they have a greater autonomous navigation range), in the light of the aggravation of the situation in the world, and in order not to be torn away for this, the same combat frigates 11356 R / M, which should track and block NATO warships in the Mediterranean.
    3. -5
      19 December 2018 10: 21
      Quote: Chichikov
      Again, everything is gone. Where to run, whom to call?

      =========
      Well, the "author" himself answered this question: ".... transfer ... to ... the FSB" lol
  3. +1
    19 December 2018 06: 24
    Oh, it was impossible for the warriors in the 90s to succumb to the general fashion of publicity. Now everyone strives to kick the fleet and the people who plan its construction. And those who really know what and how are units. The rest scoops from the Internet and scribble, scribble ... There are some fools and pests sitting upstairs, yeah. And then there were Dartanyans alone.
    PS: The chef appreciates me very much. But he always repeats that I do not see the situation from his point of view and I can not evaluate it the way he does. And while he pays me, and not me, I am inclined to believe him. Something like that.
    1. +10
      19 December 2018 06: 49
      In the same place, some fools and pests sit at the top, yeah
      - well, I don’t know about the fools, given the fact that our officials are getting richer quickly, but isn’t it about pests? One said yesterday that the increase in fuel prices would not lead to an increase in retail prices in stores, the second one shouts that there will be no problems after 45 works, and so on and so forth ...
    2. +14
      19 December 2018 07: 46
      Quote: AshiSolo
      And while he pays me, and not me, I am inclined to believe him. Something like that.
      We pay the state. Something like this.
      1. -8
        19 December 2018 10: 33
        Well, it does its job. And I do not think that you know better how to carry it out. Well, in conclusion, we must then write an article that we are all pests. We ourselves choose those who then build, manage and so on.
  4. 0
    19 December 2018 06: 42
    There are no useless warships! No need to cry. Note to the author.
    1. +6
      19 December 2018 07: 24
      it’s useful as a goat’s milk ... well, maybe it’s good for parades ... and to the border guards if something happens, to support the pants ...
      it would be better if for this money the minesweepers would rivet a couple of divisions ... with the PMO in the near zone we have a complete polar fox ... as indeed in everything ...
      1. -11
        19 December 2018 07: 40
        Well, when you finish at least high school, and after a few years go to the army, you will understand that these are pretty good. if only because they are modular.
        they can be both PLO and air defense and drummers.
        there you can put Calm, there you can put the Club family (caliber, and this is the KR and RCC and PLUR).
        the only thing is that because of the slightly shortened UKKS, Onyxes cannot be shoved there. but Caliber has RCC with a supersonic finite trajectory.
        1. +17
          19 December 2018 08: 27
          Quote: just explo
          if only because they are modular.
          they can be both PLO and air defense and drummers
          With modular ships who just did not tinker. Danes with their FLEX, Americans with LCS. In all cases, the concept ended with a drain, although in all cases it pretends that everything is great. The Danish FLEX concept is a particularly loud fail. It turned out that all this is expensive and, in practice, is not fully implemented. Firstly, you should always have more modules than ships. For example, we have 10 modular ships, what if we need 10 minesweepers? So 10 trawling modules are needed. But what if we need 10 ASW? This means that you need 10 PLO modules and so on. It turns out that for 10 hulls in the size of a corvette, we should have about 30-40 modules for different purposes, and all this economy in total costs not like 10 corvettes, but like 10 full-fledged frigates, but in fact, each of the ships directly into the sea does not matter is a highly specialized corvette. A reasonable question arises - why do we need 10 frigates with seaworthiness of corvettes and part of the weapons lying with dead cargo in ports? But that's not all, because the ship's crew cannot handle all modules in the same professional manner. This means that together with the modules, we need replacement crews with their own specialization. And some of them (while their module is not in demand) constantly sit on the shore, and want to eat like everyone else. Well, like the icing on the cake - the modules were never fully manufactured on time. There were always fewer of them than planned, and some of the modules remained in theory. As a result, the alluringly beautiful FLEX, created back in the 80s, has no heirs, except for those who tried to rethink the concept of rich Americans (who eventually abandoned it too) and even richer and smarter Russians, who, after the Danes and Americans, decided to suddenly hit the world with their modular ship ... This is the hard truth, here at least whatever one may say - and it turns out only "everything is gone."
          1. -4
            19 December 2018 08: 59
            Not certainly in that way . since here and yes and no.
            yes, for 10 ships it is possible to have 10 modules and PLO and air defense and the rest.
            but rarely when all 10 ships are used in the same role, usually no more than half, which means you need to have 5 modules.
            further - USCS allows you to shoot and PKR and KR and PLUR. which means there is one module, only the rocket changes. already ikanemeya. that is, on 5 modules or air defense (Calm or UKKS) total of all 10 modules.
            and by the way, modules are much cheaper than ships, especially than frigates. MUCH MUCH. VERY MUCH. for the radar, GAS, engine, etc., no longer need to be bought, like the hull.
            and if the frigate has a UKSK and Calm, then you still need to buy both Calm and UKSK, and yes, you can't get by with 10 modules on up to 5 ships. there you need to have only 10 "modules" for everything.
            I see only one problem - while there is no news about the promotion and creation of such modules - I saw the layouts, it seems like there was an experimental series. but about serial production is silent.
            1. +11
              19 December 2018 09: 18
              Quote: just explo
              but rarely when all 10 ships are used in the same role, usually no more than half, which means you need to have 5 modules
              One of the figs, part of these modules is made, but lies on the shore and gathers dust. In reality, all of this at the same Danes ended up with a module being stuck on each case, and he served with this module all his life. Well, or did they change them a couple of times with marketing goals rather than need. Replaceable modules were either not used or were not made at all to the extent provided by the concept.
              further - UKKS allows you to shoot and RCC and KR and PLUR
              UKKS thing is stupid, its task is to throw a rocket. The question is who will give the target designation? If you can still somehow live with the SC, the target is stationary, but there will be problems with ships and submarines. Especially with submarines, as our miracle does not have a GAS capable of giving TsU PLUR, and the helicopter does not hang in the air 24x7 and generally has on-board weapons for destroying submarines.
              Quote: just explo
              VERY MUCH. for radar, GAS
              22160 project ships do not have a radar capable of issuing a command center for a surface target, they do not have a radar capable of giving a command center for an aerial target, and they do not have a radar station capable of issuing a command center for a submarine.
              Quote: just explo
              and if the frigate has UKSK and Shtil, all the same it is necessary to buy both Shtil and UKKS
              And it will be a single harmonious organism with a strong crew and under a single control in the form of CIUS. FLEX is dead, that's a fact. Nobody in the world builds ships like that.
              1. -3
                19 December 2018 11: 15
                Quote: Alex_59
                Project 22160 ships do not have a radar capable of issuing a command center for surface targets, they do not have a radar capable of issuing a command center for air targets

                ========
                Stop stop stop !!! That is, HOW DO they NOT HAVE it ??? At 22160 there is a 3-coordinate radar "Positive-MK" !! (The same is planned to be installed on the modernized "Karakurt" (those that come with "Pantsir"). And this 3-coordinate radar is designed for search, detection and tracking marine и air (including small and low flying) targets and the issuance of target designation data for missile and artillery systems !!! And it can track up to 40 goals at a time!
                Think what you write, dear !!!
                1. +7
                  19 December 2018 11: 46
                  Quote: venik
                  Think what you write, dear !!!

                  Okay, let's think together. First, about the air defense. Most Russian air defense systems have a semi-active guidance system. That is, they need continuous target illumination using the RPN (illumination-guidance radar). Including the mentioned "Calm". We do not know anything that the ships of Project 22160 are equipped with a special on-load tap-changer for this complex. Alternatively, in theory, the ship's equipment could be modified in such a way that in the event of an attack from an air target using the Shtil air defense system, the standard Positiv radar stops operating and switches to target illumination to provide the air defense missile system. In theory, such a solution is possible, but then the ship becomes completely blind until the missile defense system hits the target. He does not detect any other targets and if someone attacks him from the flanks or from behind, he will not know about it. To be honest, the assumption is fantastic, but in reality I suppose that if there are no separate RPNs on the ship for the Shtil air defense system, this issue is simply not resolved. That is, the module with "Calm" originally announced for the ship was not created in reality and it is planned to create it sometime later. Years in 10-20. Or not at all.
                  Now about the Central Administration for NK. The "Pozitiv" radar provides detection of ship-type targets at a distance of the visible radio horizon. That is, at a distance of 20-25 km in calm conditions. Therefore, on all Russian attack ships, in addition to such a general detection radar, there is a central control complex. For example, on RTOs there is "Mineral", on boats - "Monolith". They have an over-the-horizon range and, depending on the type and weather, provide a target designation range of more than 50 km. It is these radars that provide the use of anti-ship missiles. At the MRK pr. 22800, it is "Mineral" that solves the task control for the anti-ship missiles of the "Caliber" complex. "Positive" deals with coverage of the situation - who and where flies and where to expect the threat. According to its data, it is possible to fire only missiles with an active seeker (which are not and will not be on these ships), or at surface ships within the visual visibility range (20-25 km). Something like this.
                  1. -1
                    19 December 2018 15: 00
                    Quote: Alex_59
                    okay, let's think together. First about air defense. Most Russian air defense systems have a semi-active guidance system.

                    ==========
                    Good afternoon, Alexey! The question is that, just "Calm" - has ACTIVE FPP !!! By the way, the "Positive-MK" radar station is designed to work with these complexes !!! That is precisely why I had "well-founded suspicions" that "Positive" was put "for a reason" (for "plezir") !!!
                    1. +1
                      19 December 2018 15: 12
                      Quote: venik
                      Good afternoon, Alexey! The question is that, just "Calm" - has an ACTIVE FPP !!!
                      Oh ... it would be great if so, but I have no data about it. Everywhere indicated semi-active. For example, here: http://rbase.new-factoria.ru/missile/wobb/schtil-1/schtil-1.shtml or here: http://bastion-opk.ru/shtil/
                      And why will it be active if this is the evolution of the Hurricane or its name-like analogue Buk? The same missile is used in the Buk-M3, but the composition of the means has not changed there, as before, each launcher is equipped with an illumination-guidance radar, only of a new type - a phased array. The operating algorithm is the same.
                      Of course, I admit that I don’t know something ... but something does not look like it.
                    2. 0
                      19 December 2018 18: 46
                      Good afternoon, Alexey! The question is that, just "Calm" - has an ACTIVE FPP !!!


                      Drugs - evil broom. There is no Calm ARLGSN. Nope Remember this. These rockets need light.
                      1. 0
                        24 December 2018 15: 47
                        Never argue with the blessed it is simply not real. I used to whip the same thing with millimeters, kilometers, facts and nuances of real operation. In response, you usually read to me they told me I heard I saw on the site ... Now I try to be guided by a saying, Never in sports with a fool will he crush you with experience.
            2. +9
              19 December 2018 09: 38
              further - USCS allows you to shoot and PKR and KR and PLUR. which means there is one module, only the rocket changes. already ikanemeya. that is, on 5 modules or air defense (Calm or UKKS) total of all 10 modules.


              Lord, what ucs? Container PU is not UKKS, it is completely different. Why do you climb comment on what you do not understand at all?

              It's worse than mixing chalk with cheese, by golly.
              1. -4
                19 December 2018 11: 07
                and who wrote about container PU?
                and even she can launch and KR and PLUR and RCC. and as I wrote only with Onyxes, the problem.
                1. +7
                  19 December 2018 11: 35
                  On 22160, only the container PU will rise. UCKS is not there, come to your senses. PLUR with container PU is not allowed, because it is in working form, with control systems, communication with CICS, etc. just does not exist yet, and it is not known when it will be.

                  There is only one module in the fleet - diving.
                  1. +1
                    19 December 2018 11: 45
                    firstly, Klab (the one that has an export caliber) from his PU (including the container) shoots the entire spectrum of his missiles, including the PLUR 91P1.
                    I didn’t find about BIOS now, but it is there, not Sigma, of course, but it is.
                    but what the fleet has is another question, I can also say that all frigates and corvettes must be cut into metal, because there are not enough onyxes at all.
                    in this case, it is necessary to produce Onyxes, and not to cut the ships.
                    so here, it is necessary to produce modules, and not to cut ships.
                    1. +1
                      19 December 2018 12: 19
                      Firstly, Klab (the one that has an export caliber) -

                      No one has acquired the container variant, in view of its futility.
                      1. 0
                        19 December 2018 13: 42
                        and it's not about who bought it and who not.
                        we are talking about the fact that they have a container launcher and from it it is possible to launch both anti-ship missiles and missiles and missile systems.
                      2. 0
                        19 December 2018 20: 33
                        - the fact that they have a container PU -

                        Can be launched from conventional launchers. Marine transport container (TEU) for show-offs.
                  2. +1
                    19 December 2018 15: 03
                    Quote: timokhin-aa
                    come to your senses. PLUR with container launchers are not allowed, because it is in working form, with control systems, communication with CIU, etc. just doesn't exist yet

                    ========
                    WHO told you such nonsense ??? The question of WHAT is launched from the "container" PU depends only on the BIUS !!! hi (Well, also - from the "caliber" of the missiles - WHAT will "fit" into the launcher and the BIUS "will provide" - and so "they will be shot!) ... hi
                    1. 0
                      19 December 2018 18: 52
                      Do you understand that in order to aim the PLUR the GUS is needed? And what is it on this ship there?
          2. -2
            19 December 2018 10: 57
            Quote: Alex_59
            With modular ships who just did not bother. Danes with their FLEX, Americans with LCS. In all cases, the concept ended with a drain

            ========
            And I think, from what "hangover" the Americans decided to increase the number of "modular" LCS "Independence" to 20 (just yesterday there was an article on VO!) ..... Probably this is a "concept drain" in American style ... .. wassat
            1. +2
              19 December 2018 11: 35
              This is a cut of money in American.
              1. -1
                19 December 2018 15: 06
                Quote: timokhin-aa
                This is a cut of money in American.

                ======
                Only??? Somehow all this is NOTICE !!!!! On the serious analysis - DO NOT Pull !!!
            2. +3
              19 December 2018 11: 52
              Quote: venik
              And I think, from what "hangover" the Americans decided to increase the number of "modular" LCS "Independence" to 20

              First, they are rich. "Chudit sir"))) The price of one LCS is already half the price of "Burke"
              Secondly, with these LCS everything is vague and there is no consensus. There is a version that it is better to return the good old "O.H. Perry" to operation or build their modern counterparts instead of these LCS.
              Danes developing the FLEX concept built Absalon. But these are also very wonderful guys. No one else in the world is running to build modular ships.
              1. -1
                19 December 2018 15: 12
                Quote: Alex_59
                First, they are rich. "Chudit sir"))) The price of one LCS is already half the price of "Burke"

                =======
                And almost in 6 (six!) exceeds the price 1 (one) "Bykova" !!!
                ---------
                Quote: Alex_59
                Secondly, everything is foggy with these LCSs and there is no consensus.

                ----------
                Nevertheless, according to the latest data (see yesterday's VO: https://topwar.ru/151437-vms-ssha-zakazali-esche-dva-korablja-tipa-independens.html#comment-id-8884107) - they INCREASED orders for these "laibs"! Why's that??? (I don't understand myself!) .....
        2. +1
          19 December 2018 09: 27
          they cannot be either PLO or air defense, just because they are modular. the f-16 link is on the way up, and you have an air defense module, what? You’ll shoot them down with torpedoes, but God forbid a module is installed to keep pirates ...
          1. +1
            19 December 2018 11: 08
            and what will you generally shoot down F-16s that will not fly closer than fifty kilometers?
        3. +7
          19 December 2018 09: 40
          You can not put Calm. No place. In the ordered execution there premises. Maximum container with X-35 / Caliber.
          1. -4
            19 December 2018 11: 11
            Calmness can be put there, there would be a desire
            Optionally, the air defense of ships can be represented by the 12-channel Shtil-1 anti-aircraft missile system with 24 9M317E missiles. The complex does not have its own radar; it receives information about the target from the ship’s three-coordinate radar. The fire control system includes radio transmitters for target illumination, a computer complex, optoelectronic sighting devices, a control and information display system. The fire control system is mounted in the superstructures of the ship and allows you to fire in any azimuthal directions.

            Shtil-1 uses the 9M317ME missile, which is a modification of the 9M317 Buk missile.


            http://wiki.wargaming.net/ru/Navy:%D0%9F%D0%B0%D1%82%D1%80%D1%83%D0%BB%D1%8C%D0%BD%D1%8B%D0%B5_%D0%BA%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B1%D0%BB%D0%B8_%D0%BF%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%82%D0%B0_22160#.D0.90.D0.B2.D0.B8.D0.B0.D1.86.D0.B8.D0.BE.D0.BD.D0.BD.D0.BE.D0.B5_.D0.B2.D0.BE.D0.BE.D1.80.D1.83.D0.B6.D0.B5.D0.BD.D0.B8.D0.B5
            1. 0
              19 December 2018 11: 36
              Where to put something?
              1. -2
                19 December 2018 18: 03
                Quote: timokhin-aa
                Where to put something?

                =======
                Yes, the answer is SIMPLE !!! Just "in front of the wheelhouse" is the place !!!! (Moreover, the above "diagram" does not indicate WHAT for the premises THERE are available) ..... Either "cabins and quarters" .... or "additional" (for the rescued and detained "). ...
                And in terms of "size" - JUST UVP for "Calm" ..... Moreover, both in the bow and in the stern there are "ballast tanks" ...
                1. +2
                  19 December 2018 18: 54
                  Before chopping the gym. Calm instead of it does not climb in the depths. Calm can be inserted only in a ship of special construction, with a different layout of the bow and another REV. In the ready can not.
            2. +5
              19 December 2018 12: 49
              Not. Ordered ships go without a bow slot for armament. Instead, there are residential and public buildings, as well as military posts. In general, the volume under the nasal slot is used - and this can not be changed. Well, rather, only by ordering a new series of these patrol ships, already with a bow slot for armament.

              I’ve added the official scheme of this ship in the person of the Navy.
              1. 0
                19 December 2018 13: 44
                quite possibly, about Calm they immediately wrote that the installation is optional.
                I hope they fix it. By the way, there was a rumor that they didn’t put Calm due to the fact that in the future they want to put Partin, because Calm is too fat for a small boat. here the dagger was enough b.
              2. -3
                19 December 2018 18: 11
                Quote: donavi49
                I’ve added the official scheme of this ship in the person of the Navy.

                =========
                Can you explain what kind of "residential", "public" or "aggregate" premises are located in front of the control room ??? (I - NO!) .... You GUARANTEE that these are "personnel premises" and not "reserve" volumes ??? (I - NO!)
                Well, so WHAT are we talking about ??? request
          2. -1
            19 December 2018 15: 30
            Quote: donavi49
            You can not put Calm. There is no place. In the ordered execution there premises.

            ===========
            First you need to understand:
            1) - HOW MUCH does this scheme correspond to REALITY? (There are also "tricks"!)?
            2) - A WHAT for the premises are before a cabin? (if these are cabins and cockpits - then YES! "
            3) - But what if - "reserve premises" ?. Here the questions already arise: Are there quick-removable hatches (panels)? Are there wiring (to the premises), data buses and on-board power supply?
            4) - If still - YES! (Provided) - then "re-equipment is a matter of several days (well, a couple of weeks) ... If NO - then"Oh"!!!
            Do we know the answers to these questions ??? I personally - NO!!!
            BUT! If all this is provided .... Then the Ship - UNIQUE!!!
            Well, if - NO- recourse
            1. +4
              19 December 2018 16: 36
              We have such devices, but we will not tell you about them!
        4. -2
          19 December 2018 10: 38
          Quote: just explo
          the only thing is that because of the slightly shortened UKKS it is impossible to shove Onyxes there

          =======
          Is it ??? In principle, Onyx has a length of 8,9 m, and for 3M-54E (in export version) - 8,22 m (a difference of 68 cm .... If, it's no secret, where does the information come from that 22160 is "shortened "containers and" Onyxes "do not" fit "there?
          1. +1
            19 December 2018 11: 13
            I won’t give an exact link about 22160, because I read it for a long time but there is such a problem,
            something like this
            “In recent years, launch equipment and loading facilities for the 3K14, 3M55, 9K, 3K96 missile systems, as well as for the small package torpedo complex“ Package ”, deployed on the latest ships of the Russian Navy, have been developed, commissioned or put into operation. The family of vertical launchers of surface ships of the 3C14 type ensures placement of products of the 1161K21631 complex [KRO “Caliber”] on the NK of projects 11356K, 3, 14M, and on the NK of the projects 22350, 20385, 11442M in addition to the products of the 3M55 [RCC Onyx] complexes and 9K [PLUR - missile-torpedoes of the Design Bureau "Innovator"]. KBSM is a developer and supplier of mass-produced transport launch tubes made of composite materials with a destructible lid for products of complexes 3K14 and 9K. To load the products of these complexes in PU NK, complexes of loading facilities (KSP) of the SM-456 type were created ”[17]. It is unlikely that the Onyx air defense system is inapplicable in some UKKSs due to the size of the ammunition, since 3M14 and 3M55 (without TPS) are approximately the same length (according to some reports, about 8,1 and 8,6 m). Most likely the 3S14 ammunition is cut artificially due to the control system. It looks especially ridiculous on the example of 20385 (corvette with Onyx) and 11356 (frigate without Onyx) [18] [19].
            1. -2
              19 December 2018 17: 22
              Quote: just explo
              about 22160 I won’t give an exact link now

              =====
              Well, for this - THANKS !!! (Anyway - INTERESTING!) hi
              I really want to "deal with" this DIFFERENT boat .... Although I "like it" ..... THERE IS something in it that NOT ALL see !!! (Sure !!!) hi
              1. +1
                19 December 2018 18: 56
                There IS something in it that NOT ALL see !!!


                Only people with the same brain as you can see something there that an ordinary person does not see (because there is no such thing) laughing
      2. -3
        19 December 2018 10: 24
        Quote: kepmor
        benefits from him like a goat's milk ...

        =========
        Who do you mean it ??? Project 22160 or "author" ??? laughing
    2. -2
      19 December 2018 08: 28
      This is the design of the ships that the USC can create in the current economic environment. These boats cannot serve to provide the marine component of the strategic nuclear forces.
      1. 0
        19 December 2018 17: 25
        Quote: gunnerminer
        To ensure the marine component of the strategic nuclear forces, these boats cannot serve.

        ======
        Excuse me, WHAT do these ships have to do with SNF ?????
        1. +2
          19 December 2018 18: 39
          -grow, and WHAT do these ships have to do with SNF ????? -

          To ensure the strategic nuclear forces, surface ships are required, including. For the protection and defense of patrol areas and deployment routes of the SSBN. The pilots of the project under discussion are not suitable for this task.
        2. +1
          19 December 2018 19: 02
          Quote: venik
          Excuse me, WHAT do these ships have to do with SNF ?????

          Ahem ... the main task of the fleet in the current situation is to ensure the deployment of an SSBN. If this problem is not solved, then why do we need a fleet? Show off at parades?
          At the Pacific Fleet, even taking the SSBN out of the base during the threatened period will already be a problem. But instead of equipping the fleet with ships to solve the main task, the Navy continues to order obscure ships of slurred purpose.
          1. -1
            20 December 2018 10: 30
            Quote: Alexey RA
            But instead of equipping the fleet with ships to solve the main task, the Navy continues to order obscure ships of slurred purpose.

            =========
            Well, also "Buyans", "Karakurt" ..... Well, ABSOLUTELY USEless for the deployment of strategic nuclear forces ships ....... request
    3. 0
      19 December 2018 23: 44
      Unfortunately, it happens. Unfortunately.
      Doesn't the memory of the USEFUL ones make you cry? Sorry to tears "Ural"
  5. +5
    19 December 2018 06: 53
    I agree with the author - the ship is about nothing and for sickly grandmas ... hi
    1. 5-9
      +7
      19 December 2018 07: 48
      Uninhabited? 6 lard is the cost of three Su-35S.
      1. +8
        19 December 2018 09: 39
        From which more good and no harm. In the form of several crews engaged in incomprehensible than.
        1. The comment was deleted.
          1. +3
            19 December 2018 11: 37
            20380 can build. And build.
            1. +1
              19 December 2018 11: 57
              How old is it? Yes, and with diesels, the problems seem not to be completely resolved.
              1. 0
                19 December 2018 16: 38
                This is a question of financing, and the problems with the engines have already been solved. In Loud a couple of days ago, on tests, the most comfortable mode was not economic 14 nodes, but 20, the engines work perfectly.
          2. +7
            19 December 2018 15: 43
            Quote: Rakovor
            The author, did it ever occur to you in your "smart" head that now we simply cannot build the ships that you want?

            Our industry can not build the IPC? wink

            The fact is that in the class of small ships, the main problem of the fleet is not the lack of some patrol officers to fight pirates. The main problem of our Navy is that the basis of the OVR of all fleets is still the IPC pr. 1124 and 1124M, built in the 80s of the last century. And if the fleet does not want to be left without an OVR at all (and everything goes to this - the "albatrosses" do not last forever), then it is urgent to order at least three dozen new IPCs. But the Navy is instead ordering patrol ships without a full-fledged GAS, yeah ...
            1. +2
              19 December 2018 18: 40
              -the fleets are still IPC pr. 1124 and -

              By the directive of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation from the fall of 2016, their crews, even in addition to the problems, were allowed to equip conscripts. As ordinary and foremen.
        2. -4
          19 December 2018 17: 27
          Quote: timokhin-aa
          From which more good and no harm. In the form of several crews engaged in incomprehensible than.

          ==========
          ABOUT!!!! I wrote in the "commentary" that you, dear, Thank God for the videoconferencing did not start .... Still here - they decided to "climb" ..... request angry
        3. -4
          19 December 2018 17: 30
          Quote: timokhin-aa
          From which more good and no harm. In the form of several crews engaged in incomprehensible than.

          =========
          So, you, dear (former "marine") - also in Aviation - "specialist" ???? Congratulations!!! soldier
  6. The comment was deleted.
  7. 5-9
    0
    19 December 2018 07: 46
    All right, provided that these ships really The Navy wants to use against the terrible Somali pirates, doing irreparable harm to Russian maritime trade in the Indian Ocean and jeopardizing the very existence of the Russian state :))) And not in any closed sea versus all kinds of limotrophs.
    We have everything - anti-terrorist exercises ... how can we fight terrorists without tank battalions under the guise of S-400 divisions and long-range aviation? :)

    PS: Although it seems we are building any troughs that we can build here and now.
    1. +2
      19 December 2018 09: 39
      And not in any closed sea against any limitrophe.


      Limitrofov just fenders gored.
      1. 5-9
        -2
        19 December 2018 10: 29
        Well, as the last bastion protecting the "civilized world" - Durkaina - will collapse, so we will take over the whole world :). And the limitrophes will be farther and farther from the ridden penates :)
        In general, he can hang out in the Eastern Mediterranean, show a flag. Special Forces pirates will not capture him, but every time, they will fly a Tu-22M or MiG-31 with Daggers ... with special warheads naturally. 22350, 20380 or 22160 here - no difference.
        1. 0
          19 December 2018 11: 37
          All this could be done with existing ships without having to discharge 36 yards.
    2. +3
      19 December 2018 15: 47
      Quote: 5-9
      And not in any closed sea against any limitrophe.

      As practice has shown, in the closed sea, ships based on sea tugs and icebreakers are most effective against limitrophes. smile
      And not a cardboard stealth miracle - as, by the way, practice also showed:
  8. +3
    19 December 2018 08: 14
    With all these shortcomings, I, the land person, like the design and look of the boat))) smile
    1. +4
      19 December 2018 08: 26
      The enemy does not inflict blows by design and appearance.
      1. -2
        19 December 2018 08: 38
        "A beautiful plane and flies beautifully ..." I think it extends to ships ...
        1. +6
          19 December 2018 10: 32
          For Unarmedians such an argument will come down.
  9. +2
    19 December 2018 08: 56
    offshore patrol vessel

    The consonance is so suspicious.
    OPK - offshore-sawn ship.
    1. 0
      22 December 2018 01: 24
      The military industrial complex was deciphered for a long time, guessed it yourself, or was there a clue from the 77 British brigade?
  10. 0
    19 December 2018 08: 58
    You say so, as if it was something unusual. Our aircraft carrier is being repaired for some reason, the repair price is a regiment of fighters. Although it may be a hit just because 10 aircraft carriers are not being built.
  11. +6
    19 December 2018 09: 12
    I agree with the author, a very strange ship, for the patrol functions the FSB has worked out a project 22460 for the fight against pirates, launching a whole series of 6 ships is somehow strange, but for the rest I do not see any advantages
    1. 0
      19 December 2018 09: 40
      Because there are none, benefits.
      1. -2
        19 December 2018 10: 11
        How do you know about this? You were on it, exploited? You collect rumors and gossip on the Internet, like a bazaar woman.
        1. -2
          19 December 2018 11: 38
          Essentially there is something to object to? For example, to prove to me that the DSL on the meter-wave will not be thrown up and it will go into the slip? Weak?
          1. 0
            19 December 2018 12: 04
            It will rise against the wave and the DSL will come running. And anyway, what are you attached to this DSHL as if this is his main weapon? You claim that after 1-1,5 months of moderate pitching, the crew will not be able to fulfill their duties. And I, as a man who went to sea, I say - even as I can. And then with the pirates it will cope in any scenario.
            1. -2
              19 December 2018 16: 44
              Against the waves, he will stand up and DSHL will go by at a run.


              But who was on the test, breshut that only the trident testers could go on her slip even with zero excitement.

              And who to believe, eh?
  12. BAI
    +3
    19 December 2018 10: 28
    it was an even wilder statement.

    Firstly, according to the current legislation, the patrolling of territorial waters and the exclusive economic zone in Russia is assigned to the FSB Coast Guard, which is clearly indicated on the FSB website,

    In the light of recent events - in the Black Sea this task will have to be solved precisely by the Navy. Therefore, regarding the Black Sea - not just the right decision, but even belated.
    The FSB should not fight the warships of another state. "Emerald" got a hole from the tug.
    1. +1
      19 December 2018 10: 43
      Here, at least one sensible thought.))
    2. -1
      19 December 2018 11: 39
      The Black Sea Fleet can solve this problem by what it is.
      1. +2
        19 December 2018 11: 58
        This "what is" is 30-40 years old already.
        1. +4
          19 December 2018 15: 56
          Quote: Rakovor
          This "what is" is 30-40 years old already.

          So maybe a change to what is Do you need to build ships of the same class and purpose? And not an incomprehensible modular miracle without modules?
          The same MPK "Suzdalets", which stood behind the PSKR during the well-known events near the strait, became part of the fleet already in 1983 and is armed with a full-fledged ZAK, SAM, RBU, TA with SET-65 and two full-fledged GAS.
          They write him off - who will deal with PLO? "Bulls" without modules?
        2. -2
          19 December 2018 16: 45
          IAC project 21630 overtake from the Caspian Sea, this Ukram enough. The ideal tool in places like Azov is nothing superfluous, a small draft, a gun is just a miracle, not a gun (after it was modified with a file). 100 millimeters, anyway.

          And you do not need to build anything.
  13. +9
    19 December 2018 10: 34
    I do not know, the capabilities of the ship, about which the author cares so much, but his fears about the unrest in the Gulf of Aden are the height of unprofessionalism. Was that there yourself? I have been and many times. Stood at Socotra for months. In different years and at different times of the year. I was in Somalia when they were friends with us, well, there is nothing to say about Yemen and Ethiopia. There is no strong excitement there, and if it happens it will not last long. No battle group will lose combat effectiveness from seasickness. Yes, and people get used to rolling and do not suffer as much as the author cares. I will say more, we sunbathed on a boat on a superstructure in the open ocean. It is forbidden, but the commander "closed his eyes". He was too kind and pitied people. He gave him a sunbath. And the excitement did not interfere.
    1. +1
      19 December 2018 10: 46
      What are you? But the author claims that after a month of combat service, the entire crew will be "in bed" and will not be able to cope even with a pirate "motorboat".))
      1. +2
        19 December 2018 14: 02
        this is a fad among the "sailors" who are so afraid of pitching that give them no less than a battleship .... and one of them intimidated me with the fact that on the Inquisitive !!! in a month I will be blown away by the pitching ....... I crossed the sea in a storm on a boat 25 meters long and survived nothing and the addiction is generally quite fast, it's good that the pilots are not afraid of heights, tankers and leaders do not suffer from claustrophobia, artillerymen and rocket men noise, and the infantry is not afraid to run sometimes with full gear ...... "if everyone was spoiled like Vova, then we would have been conquered long ago"
        1. 0
          19 December 2018 16: 47
          Funny. All irresponsible amicably against naval aviation, against the rational expenditure of money on the Navy, but for 22160))))

          It's just a sign over some! laughing
          1. +1
            19 December 2018 22: 18
            YOU are not accurate, they are both against aviation and against submarines, minesweepers and corvettes of all kinds, including patrol forces, and against ground forces ...... they are for supercarrier battleships superlinked destroyers, or at least give them super battleship wunderwaffe ... for less agree ..... pitching interferes
      2. +1
        19 December 2018 18: 53

        What are you? But the author claims that after a month of combat service, the entire crew will be "in bed" and will not be able to cope even with a pirate "motorboat".))
        ... And by the way, his (the author's) beloved 20380, just after his first return after Mediterranean duty, were not happy with the seaworthiness of that particular project ?!
        1. 0
          22 December 2018 21: 25
          Who told you that?
          1. 0
            25 December 2018 15: 19
            timokhin-aa (Alexander Timokhin) December 22, 2018 21:25
            0
            Who told you that?
            it was on the site "float.com", after the first cruise of the Baltic corvettes in the Mediterranean.

            timokhin-aa Fleet, it was a matter of getting useless ships. It happened that he built something with his last money. But in order to get a series of useless, almost inappropriately designed ships at once
            Well, this is more likely just about 20380 ?! At 17 lards per unit, the ship that has really nothing to fight with the submarine (neither full-fledged torpedoes, nor anti-submarine missile-torpedoes, even if it detects one), and with a fully functional air defense system (de facto only close missiles). Then why sculpt on the PLO corvette BMZ - an expensive "redoubt" ?! After all, the "Osa-MA", "Pantsir-I", the maximum of the modified "calm" would be enough.
            1. 0
              25 December 2018 21: 33
              Well, firstly, 324 mm may well submerge the submarine, you just need to get close to her to attack. The anti-torpedoes who are part of the armament of this ship help to get close. Also attack the submarine can helicopter.

              I do not argue that these ships need to be modernized, firstly, by installing inclined guides PLUR (this is possible on this ship and will not be very expensive), and secondly, by replacing the "Packet" launcher with a light torpedo tube of the same caliber for the same torpedoes, and ensuring the possibility of delivering torpedoes from the cellar for the ASP (he is there next) to the torpedo deck.

              Still need to replace SGDS on modern.
              And - lo and behold - we get a great counterdisheater!

              The problem with the radio correction of the missile defense system is solved by mounting the second "Puma" on the foremast and including it in the CIUS. Also solvable. But even without this, the existing corvettes were "finished", on dozens of CMs they easily knock down supersonic low-altitude targets.

              But to sink ships both with rockets and from a cannon, to support the landing of troops by fire, it can now. The gun there is 100 mm, the problems with it are completely solved, it shoots so precisely that the warhead-2 jaw drops, including on the air targets.

              The officers who received "Loud" at the Pacific Fleet last week are simply delighted with it. Even his optimal speed turned out to be 4 knots HIGHER than expected (the economy speed was set to 14 knots, it turned out that the ship goes best at 20).

              By seaworthiness - rut. It is limited only by the displacement, up to 5 points from the ship V / Vmax = 1. Where you more seaworthiness?

              If there were problems with it, then after going to the Red Sea (and not to the Mediterranean, be precise), they would not be let out to the open ocean anymore, but in fact they go there, and they don’t blow.

              The combat value of 22160 is simply impossible to compare with 20380.
              1. 0
                26 December 2018 01: 02
                SW Alexander, you bring up really interesting topics, and you are good as an author of articles (Ryabov can’t keep up with it directly). But
                Quote: timokhin-aa
                The combat value of 22160 is simply impossible to compare with 20380.
                , yes, admit, the comparison of the patrolman and corvette PLO BMZ itself, to put it mildly, is not entirely correct. Give them (22160) at least a year and a half like services and we will see their destiny.

                Po 20380,
                Quote: timokhin-aa
                The officers who received "Loud" at the Pacific Fleet last week are simply delighted with it.
                ... After a long "bezryby" of new ships at the Pacific Fleet, they will rejoice at anything. Believe me, I am very sorry that this happened with the Pacific Fleet, and for this I say this without sarcasm.

                Quote: timokhin-aa
                Well, firstly, 324 mm could well sink the submarines, you just need to get close to it for an attack.
                , and you believe that the submarine will let you approach it for 18 km? Is this not a farce?

                Quote: timokhin-aa
                Also, a helicopter can attack a submarine.
                . Corvette pr.11661-K can also hope for a helicopter, but thanks to TA and UKKS, it will be able to attack submarines by itself already for 50 km., Is not it? This is to say that the helicopter has no more than one 324 mm torpedo (and then probably not always, but oh well), and if the submarine discovered by him (Ka 27 PL) at a distance of 35-50 km from the corvette will lead the torpedo launched from helicopter, to a trap (or detonated torpedo), your favorite project (with its sky-high price) will be powerless to watch the enemy’s submarine that goes into the distance, while the cheaper 11661 will be able to attack it (submarine) repeatedly, and more than once, being pointed from a helicopter.

                Quote: timokhin-aa
                I don’t argue, these ships need to be modernized,
                ... Where else, when and so the price of one 20380 for 17 billion?! 20385, for 20 billion ?! You can, of course, object to me that there is no GAS on "Dagestan", but I am sure that you yourself will find in open sources what was originally (according to the project it was provided there, and the ship pr. 11661-K was "castrated" to the MRK already in the process of construction protracted at the end of the 90s). I hope you will not deny that in this way (i.e. by returning the GAS to Project 11661), the Navy will receive a BMZ corvette, much cheaper in construction and no less effective in terms of PLO. The experience of building them near Zelenodolsk is just the freshest.

                Well, in the end, Uv. Alexander, imagine in the abstract that you are an official placing the State Defense Order of the Navy, what is more logical to order for construction in the limit of 230-250 billion? 10 corvettes pr. 20380 and 2 pr. 20385? or as an alternative to them 3 frigates 22350 and 9 corvettes pr.11661-K ?! On draft 20386, I completely agree with you (it seems your article was - "worse than a crime").
                In a nutshell - "and how rationally the funds are spent in planning and implementing the state defense order."
                1. 0
                  26 December 2018 22: 38
                  Give them (22160) at least a year and a half to be like services and we will see their purpose.


                  First, the purpose is determined, the necessity of performing tasks for such a mission and the possibility of their fulfillment within the TTZ is justified, and only then the first drawing of the future ship is made.

                  And most importantly, in some cases, for us, such a big war is squirming, building non-combat ships for the last money in such circumstances is treason to the Motherland in its purest form.

                  Your constructions on 20380 are refuted by the fact that it has a search speed of 20 knots, at least in the last tests of Loud it turned out that the "doped" corvette runs the best at this speed, this is "his" mode. So, at 20 nodes, the nuclear submarine is already noisy, and the diesel engine simply cannot get away from it, that's all. PLUR only needs to be installed, and it will be OK.

                  The price at 17 yards is largely due to the stupidity of the Customer, who constantly revised the project, as a result of three identical 20380 not yet in nature. And this is money. Plus delays in financing, plus inflation indexing, plus a damn management, when the shipyard is unable (organizationally) at first, for example, to order components, then bookmark so that the hull does not stand and wait for the same diesel engines or REVs. Plus the fact that the Northern shipyard has long been turned into a sawing shop, had this order gone to Yantar, for example, it would have been built in more quickly, and the price would have been lower by tens of percent.

                  Well, from the same point of view, analyze 22160, how is it with PLO)))
                  1. 0
                    27 December 2018 23: 30
                    [quote = timokhin-aa] [quote] Well, from the same point of view 22160, analyze how he has with PLO))) [/ quote]
                    You will laugh, Alexander, but for now, that is almost the same as in 20380 (in the sense that he can only rely on the same KA 27 helicopter and its torpedo), which he also has the ability to carry. Yes, there is no "package-nk" for self-defense, but the price of 6 is not 17 ?! Sori didn't mean to annoy you.

                    [quote = timokhin-aa] on the last tests of "Loud" it turned out that the "doped" corvette runs best at this speed, this is "his" mode. So, at 20 nodes the nuclear submarine is already making noise, .... [/ quote] You do not admit that the nuclear submarine (potential enemy) will "hear" (see if you like) a corvette from 40 km and probably even more, and this distance is quite suitable for an attack (with the same Mk 48 torpedo, or rocket), but she is unlikely to let the corvette closer to her. Both Moose and Virginia have a submerged speed of about 30 knots easily. But 20380, to get it yourself at this distance (35-50 km.) Alas, there is nothing (about that and the conversation).
                    [quote = timokhin-aa] and the diesel engine simply cannot get away from him, that's all [/ quote] there is no dispute, but I think the diesel boat, having heard it earlier, will simply "hide" (minimum speed or stop the car and the simulator towards the bullet) , and will not try to escape, realizing that it will make noise and turn from a hunter into a victim.
                    [quote = timokhin-aa] PLUR only needs to be installed, and it will be OK. [/ quote] And here again I completely agree with you !!! But the trouble is, this is again a change in the project (not the first, but finally necessary), and therefore again a partial rise in price, not the cheapest of the corvettes, is it ?! And by the way, on 11661 everything that is needed is already there (both TA 533mm and UKKS, only GUS to return!)
                    And if you consider that [quote = timokhin-aa] - First, the purpose is determined, the necessity of performing tasks for this purpose and the possibility of their implementation are substantiated [/ quote], then our question about PLUR is with you, directly to the creators of pr. 20380. Do not find ?! Like - "and how you say such a marvelous and expensive created but without the necessary?"
                    1. 0
                      28 December 2018 04: 24
                      You will laugh Alexander, but for now, almost like 20380 (in the sense of, he can only hope for the same 27 spacecraft and its torpedo)


                      Strange logic. 22160 doesn’t have a GUS capable of detecting SPs. And there is no cellar for torpedoes. You know that refueling and suspension of weapons in the hangar are prohibited in the Navy, right?

                      True, it is no longer funny.
                      Let's change the vector so to speak, and you show me that the communications boat roughly corresponds to the combat effectiveness of the 20380, okay? This is the same level of discussion as it is, not higher.

                      do not assume that the nuclear submarine (potential enemy) will "hear" (see if you like) a corvette from 40 km and probably even more, and this distance is quite suitable for an attack (with the same Mk 48 torpedo


                      Have you ever heard Mk.48? This nasty screaming sound))))? Why then write this here? laughing

                      20380 has the ability to TAKE the torpedoes going at it, to have time to lift the helicopter, to use the means of SGPD.
                      For the 22160 crew, a torpedo blast will be the signal of a torpedo attack.
                      And this we still do not consider the factor DEPL, which cannot get away from 20380.
                      And 22160 can pass over it a hundred times or two hundred and hear nothing - there is nothing.

                      Both Moose and Virginia have a submerged speed of about 30 knots easily. But 20380, to get it yourself at this distance (35-50 km.) Alas, there is nothing (about that and the conversation).


                      By helicopter. Ka-27 can carry both buoys and torpedoes simultaneously.
                      And on the 22160 torpedoes can not be placed - nowhere.

                      But the trouble is again a change in the project (not the first, but finally necessary), and therefore again a partial rise in price, not the cheapest of corvettes, is it ?! And by the way, on 11661, everything you need is already there (and TA 533mm and UKS, just return GUS!)


                      Rise in price, but it is a rise in price that makes sense - the ship from it becomes more efficient. But 22160 does not make sense, since it is in principle non-viable, it simply is not a warship. For example on survivability. It is impossible to compare it with warships, only with non-combat ships.

                      11661 cannot be redone, GAS can only be added to a new ship under construction, but it has Ukrainian gearboxes and turbines, and domestic gearboxes are not being developed for it.
                      Although, having designed the 11661E hull with "lettered" serial equipment and the power plant from 20380, you can get a good PLO corvette, and the price will be within ten.

                      And for such a ship, instead of 22160, I would "vote". But the Navy had other plans.

                      Like - "and how you say such a marvelous and expensive created but without the necessary?"


                      It was made not as an anti-submarine corvette, but as an ersatz frigate "from what was." But there is a question, yes.
                      However, on 20380 it can be solved.

                      With 22160, nothing can be done at all. Only on a target to let them go, really.
                      Or remake in PCPD.
                      1. 0
                        29 December 2018 15: 48
                        Dear Alexander, you again stubbornly try to contrast 20380 against 22160, and you stubbornly do not notice that I am trying to compare not them, but just 20380 (like, in my personal and certainly subjective opinion) versus 11661-K (according to the criteria - the price of construction / Possibilities of providing anti-aircraft defense in BMZ, since in fact this is their main function) !! But pr. 22160 versus 20380 is not entirely correct to compare. The main function of the first, it seems to me, is escorting vessels during a long voyage by sea, and some kind of anti-piracy operations are far from their bases, but 20380, whatever one may say, is still a submarine in the BMZ.
                        Have you ever heard Mk.48? This nasty screaming sound))))? Why then write this here?
                        Forgive me, I would not want to offend anyone, but I think that the last one who heard it was the Kursk crew, but due to the small distance, it was too late to avoid the attack ...
                        11661 cannot be redone, GAS can only be added to a new ship under construction, but it has Ukrainian gearboxes and turbines, and domestic gearboxes are not being developed for it.
                        Ukrainian turbines just need to be replaced with domestic M-70 FRUs (they are similar in power) and develop their gearboxes (by analogy with the Ukrainian). You noticed it rightly.
                        Although, having designed the 11661E hull with "lettered" serial equipment and the power plant from 20380, you can get a good PLO corvette, and the price will be within ten.
                        And for such a ship, instead of 22160, I would "vote".
                        !? Or really supply a domestic diesel-diesel power plant. In either of these two options, even if its price approaches not 10, but 12,5 lard, it will be cheaper to replace the "Albatross", and that's what I mean, my dear interlocutor !!
                        But the Navy had other plans.
                        This is what is alarming in a limited budget. It is one thing to build 12 units. 20380 and 2 units. 20385 in the amount of 245-250 billion, and quite another: 4 units. 22350 and 10 units. 11661-K, for the same (if not a smaller amount of funds). Although in appearance, yes, the fleet will receive 14 units. warships, but alas, completely different possibilities !! That's what the conversation is about.
                        It was made not as an anti-submarine corvette, but as an ersatz frigate "from what was."
                        - uh ...
                        However, on 20380 it can be solved.
                        it’s possible to decide, but where to increase its cost, then it’s easier to refuse, and go to 20385. That is, not 17 but 21-23, but UKKS compensates for the ability to carry PLUR (according to your own logic).
                      2. 0
                        29 December 2018 22: 50
                        You know, you can argue a lot about whether to continue the 20380 series (my opinion is that until an alternative is developed - it’s worth it, we just don’t have the opportunity to pull with new ships, we need to build as much as we can right now and catch up with the total number of corvettes on the Pacific Fleet and The Baltic has up to two full 6 ship brigades, at the same time laying down a brigade for the Black Sea Fleet, where there are only four large surface ships on the move, but there is no need to cling to it in the future).
                        You can discuss the likelihood and necessity of creating a PLO diesel corvette on the body in 11661 sizes.

                        But the uselessness, worthlessness and uselessness of 22160 is out of the question here in my opinion.
                      3. 0
                        29 December 2018 23: 39
                        Finally.
                        You know, you can argue a lot about whether it is worth continuing the 20380 series (my opinion is that until an alternative is developed ...
                        So it already exists, and is practically embodied in the metal - 11661-K (or 11661-E, as for Vietnam, if you like this designation more). And about the two possible options for the power plant, we seem to have discussed above (either with the Saturn M-70 FRU, or diesel-diesel. Both are acceptable and relatively easy to implement).
                        ...- it’s worth, we simply don’t have the opportunity to pull with new ships, we need to build as much as we can right now and catch up with the total number of corvettes in the Pacific Fleet and Baltic to two full 6 ship brigades ...
                        Yes, I agree, but

                        at the same time, right now, laying down a brigade for the Black Sea Fleet, where now there are only four large surface ships on the move.
                        to lay again new 20380 and not 11661, as you said earlier - "more than a crime" (in the article on 20386), from the point of view of spending the defense budget !!
                        But the uselessness, worthlessness and uselessness of 22160 is out of the question here in my opinion.
                        But for that purpose and purpose are still different. Like a year or two at the service, and we will see everything. Useful or not.
    2. 0
      19 December 2018 11: 40
      South of Socories on the 300-400 miles, everything is different.
      And in the Gulf of Aden quietly, yes, I myself wrote about it.
  14. 0
    19 December 2018 10: 39
    But actually, does it make a difference which ship? You can take a battle with superior enemy forces and die without dropping the honor of the fleet in any kalosh - remember the "Korean". And sometimes even it turned out in this situation to win ("Mercury", "Vesta"). On the contrary, with complete superiority in forces over the enemy, we cannot successfully fight (the actions of the Black Sea Fleet and Red Banner Baltic Fleet in the Great Patriotic War).
    1. +2
      19 December 2018 16: 00
      Quote: Narak-zempo
      You can take a battle with superior enemy forces and die without losing the honor of the fleet, you can on any stick

      The purpose of the war is not to die for your homeland, but to make the enemy die for your own. ©
      And it’s hardly worth building ships whose main task is to perish with honor (because with their armament and equipment they will even theoretically not be able to inflict any damage on the enemy).
  15. 0
    19 December 2018 10: 42
    Project 22160 patrol ships are Russian patrol ships of a modular type, a distant sea zone, developed in the Northern Design Bureau and built at the A. Gorky Zelenodolsk Plant to replenish the naval fleet of Russia.
    Designed for patrolling the protection of territorial waters, patrolling the 200-mile exclusive economic zone in open and closed seas, stopping smuggling and piracy, searching and assisting victims of maritime disasters, environmental monitoring of the environment in peacetime, guarding ships and ships at the crossing by sea, as well as naval bases and water areas in order to warn of an attack by various enemy forces and equipment - in wartime, as well as operations in the distant sea and ocean zones.
    The universality of any design always leads somewhere in the plus, and somewhere in the minus. But it’s unambiguous to say that such ships are worthless, and only cut and cut. Theorists themselves would be forced to repair, make ships. So that you know what hellish work of a huge number of people !!!
    1. +1
      19 December 2018 11: 42
      Labor is labor, but in vain as a result, as well as expenses. This is a shame. But Zelenodolsk has an excellent experience - 11661E. To him to develop a diesel generator set on the basis of DDA12000, an excellent ship could turn out to be very useful.
  16. wax
    +1
    19 December 2018 11: 51
    I am an absolute dilettante in these matters, but after all ... The Sea of ​​Azov is very hot.
    1. -3
      19 December 2018 16: 48
      We are transferring the 21630 MAC from the Caspian Sea to the Ukraine alone. Without FSB, without Buyanov-M, etc.
  17. +1
    19 December 2018 12: 36
    And that we have the author of a great pro in shipbuilding in the Navy? He alone replaces the whole staff of the main headquarters of the Navy and numerous Navy NI? Too peremptory judgments, I am not special in this field, but somehow I do not want to consider the former Commander-in-Chief of the Navy and his main headquarters quite profane for the decisions made on the construction of these ships.
    1. +2
      19 December 2018 13: 53
      -but somehow I do not want to consider the former Commander-in-Chief of the Navy and his main headquarters quite profane for the decisions taken on the construction of these ships.

      They are not ignoramuses, but they know how to keep their nose in the wind. Or, on a budget, stretch your legs.
    2. -2
      19 December 2018 16: 49
      There is not a profanity case, but the fact that the same Chirkov immediately after his dismissal made a mega-career in the shipbuilding industry - in the American style, he took the chair of the adviser, with a super-salary but without responsibility.
      1. -1
        19 December 2018 20: 35
        - that the very same Chirkov immediately after his dismissal made a mega-career in the shipbuilding industry -

        I did it right.
  18. 0
    19 December 2018 13: 14
    judging by such a depth of analysis and the quality of the work done, the author really liked this boat and not only ...
  19. 0
    19 December 2018 13: 53
    What kind of Somali pirates do you really need?
  20. +1
    19 December 2018 13: 55
    Timokhin suggests removing the "unnecessary compartment for modular weapons" ..... maybe this is the most important compartment there?
    1. 0
      19 December 2018 14: 05
      and what will be unknown in this compartment, then it makes no sense to argue about what we don’t know
  21. +1
    19 December 2018 14: 44
    I wonder how it is possible to ensure the landing of the inspection team from a motor boat at 3 and more than a meter of ocean waves? laughing
    This is about the seaworthiness of small ships, the landing of helicopters on the deck in the 5 ball storm and the insurance of the inspection team from a second, same fragile motor boat.

    It’s time to abandon the use of motor boats in the ocean and switch to landing of an inspection group from a helicopter UAV with a payload capacity of 400 kg, while another helicopter UAV will keep the deck of the ship under examination under observation, in order to connect the gun and machine guns of the ship.
    And the cable landing of the helicopter assault and the "harpoon" landing of the UAV helicopter on the deck of the ship have long been worked out in any rough sea.

    PS Request to the authors of articles about the Navy - be more creative, do not push water in a mortar like an active participant in the Russian cluster of the British "Integration Initiative" Andrey from Chelyabinsk.
    1. 0
      20 December 2018 10: 43
      Quote: Operator
      This is about the seaworthiness of small ships, landing helicopters on deck in a 5-point storm

      =======
      Dear Andrey! AT 5-6 ball storm - even helicopters from aircraft carriers - DO NOT FLY !!!!
      PS And do not say, please, STUPID !!!
      1. 0
        20 December 2018 13: 14
        If you do not know anything ("harpoon" take-off and landing of deck helicopters / UAVs), then it is better to remain silent - you will pass for a smart one.
  22. +2
    19 December 2018 15: 04
    The best example of "modularity" is the UVP Mk.41.
    We still need to overcome our military-industrial feudalism: this is when it will be possible to put anti-aircraft missiles and products of other design bureaus in the UKKS.
  23. -5
    19 December 2018 15: 31
    In the Russian Navy there are people who count many moves ahead. If you ordered this Ship, then you have calculated everything, so there are tasks that we don’t understand, since we are people of strategic thinking. There are no fools in the Russian Navy
    1. +7
      19 December 2018 16: 17
      Quote: Е2 - Е4
      In the Russian Navy there are people who count many moves ahead.

      That's right. © smile
    2. 0
      19 December 2018 16: 50
      Colonel Navy detected laughing

      Chota LOL.
  24. 0
    19 December 2018 16: 32
    The fight against Somali pirates should excite us as in the old joke "Blacks' problems do not bother the white sheriff" Plus this ship is the presence of a helicopter and a GAS (with relatively small dimensions and crew) - helicopters, by the way, are one of the main means of fighting submarines. ships capable of detecting submarines we have not a lot, we can only rejoice that at least they have accepted Well, stealth, if you replace the Ka 27 with the Ka 52 and land troops from the boat, can be used for sabotage in the coastal zone. A highly specialized but quite useful thing, The whole problem is that large ships have now ceased to be built so they have to spin
    1. +5
      19 December 2018 16: 52
      Quote: Old_Ded_Mitrich
      The advantage of this boat is the presence of a helicopter and a helicopter (with relatively small dimensions and a crew) - helicopters, by the way, are one of the main means of fighting submarines

      Judging by the available photographs of the GAS "Ariadna", announced for the project 22160, it looks more like the GAS PLO, and more like the GAS detecting PDSS.
      That is, in order to turn 22160 into an IPC, you need to get at least 2 full-fledged GAS from somewhere and put it - a low and a low one. And also - TA (preferably with a "package") and RBU (for shallow depths). Plus at least a ZRAK for self-defense from a pair of anti-ship missiles.
      1. +2
        19 December 2018 18: 59
        And split the machine armored, at least.
  25. exo
    +3
    19 December 2018 16: 47
    The fleet is being built, haphazardly. According to the principle: "we build what we can." Hence the problems. There are engines, for the type of ship, and we build it. Then, in hindsight, the leadership of the Navy tries to publicly "justify" such a construction. At the very least, some logic can be seen in the construction of submarines.
  26. -2
    19 December 2018 16: 54
    Alternative History ... It could be so if it were, as I think :-) Some kind of nonsense. A set of conventions and assumptions. I didn’t read it. Started to yawn
  27. -1
    19 December 2018 17: 00
    And where did everyone get the idea that project 22160 should be sent to the Indian Ocean, forced to hunt for Virginias or cover Kuzya in the Atlantic))) The ship has good characteristics, modularity makes it possible to perform a wide range of tasks (and it does not matter that the Ministry of Defense is not revealed all the developments in this matter).
    1. 0
      19 December 2018 19: 01
      He does not have the characteristics. Now the fighters from the state will return, a month or two and all the shoals will know. But much is already clear, it is simply better to wait for the seamen with accurate info.

      And modularity is fake, this concept does not work.
  28. -1
    19 December 2018 17: 57
    the author wrote a lot of text ..... although the answer to where this ship will operate is very simple: the Sea of ​​Azov ... and local pirates ... and the local "mosquito fleet" ...
    1. 0
      19 December 2018 19: 03
      How do you dislike the idea of ​​using existing 21630 on Azov? They are more powerful, they have already been built, developed and mastered by the crews, their draft is less than a meter and they can maneuver more freely on Azov.

      And they already have that most important thing.
    2. +1
      19 December 2018 19: 11
      Quote: House 25 Sq. 380
      the author wrote a lot of text ..... although the answer to where this ship will operate is very simple: the Sea of ​​Azov ... and local pirates ... and the local "mosquito fleet" ...

      For the "Pirates of the Sea of ​​Azov" border guards will be enough - pr. 745P. If it is very tight, you can transfer one of the pr.97P there, so generally do not care about the presence of something floating right along the course. smile
      If it is necessary to strengthen the naval component, then in the Caspian there are already three IAC pr. 21630.
  29. -1
    19 December 2018 18: 51
    And the author did not think about the workload of shipbuilding facilities? And why are 22160 made in Zelenodolsk? They are not capable of anything more, but 22160 will be more abruptly "karakurt" ...
    1. +6
      19 December 2018 19: 06
      Quote: basilisk
      They are not capable of anything more, but 22160 will be more abruptly "karakurt" ...

      What is better than that? Paper modules and mock-ups thereof?
      There is no 3C14 on 22160 and there is nowhere to put it. "Pantsir-M" is not there either. There is no "Monolith" or its analogues. There is nowhere to put the illumination radar for the air defense system.
      Will we threaten the adversary with diving equipment? For these are the only containers that are in the iron.
      1. -3
        19 December 2018 19: 25
        And seaworthiness, versatility? Are there diving equipment on the "karakurt"? Modularity is about development, perspective. The assignment of ships is the fulfillment of a combat mission, and not a threat to an adversary.
        1. 0
          19 December 2018 20: 32
          Quote: basilisk
          And seaworthiness,

          So, 22800 have no complaints about it. Their predecessors had problems with seaworthiness - 21361.
          Quote: basilisk
          versatility?

          But she is not. In the absence of modules that must be installed in the cells. And for the lack of a nasal cell.
          In addition, as already written, versatility was good on paper. But in fact, all countries that built universal modular ships, in fact, use them with a constant configuration of modules. For interchangeable modules require interchangeable teams, and teams trained in their use on this particular type of ship.
          Quote: basilisk
          The purpose of the ships is to carry out a combat mission, not a thunderstorm to an adversary.

          And what combat tasks within the Navy can be performed by 22160 with existing modules?
          Yes, he officially has 80% of the tasks not related to the fleet, but to the battlefield.
          Quote: basilisk
          Modularity is development, perspective.

          There is no prospect there. For with the available cells for the modules and the permanent equipment 22160 can not even carry out the tasks of the IPC as part of the OVR - it is banal because it does not have cells for two HUS.
    2. +3
      19 December 2018 21: 34
      And the author did not think about the workload of shipbuilding capacities? And why are 22160 made in Zelenodolsk? They are not capable of anything more, but 22160 will be cooler "karakurt" ..

      The author thought about many things and in many ways correctly. It's just that he (and we) most likely do not take into account that it was these ships that the Navy ordered most likely for convoy and anti-piracy escorts (say to Tartus, and later possibly to Algeria, where they seem to want a new base) of caravans like the Syrian Express , and from merchant ships (pirates are unlikely to attack the BDK), but in light of the general aggravation of the international situation, it is probably dangerous to send merchant ships alone ... And as for your (basilisk (Vasily)), "karakurt will be cooler" . ", then there would be, just Zelenodolsk, God himself ordered urgently a series of 11661 (in its original form, and with GAS, and with already UKSK as in" Dagestan ", and possibly even modified to the modern level, and with ZRAK "Pantsir-M") should be launched in a wide series. And there is experience, while Vietnam was released, the cadres raised their hand. And just with them, whose price will not exceed 17 lard per unit, smoothly (or better of course quickly) change the aging Albatrosses (IPC). Well, I think so.
  30. -2
    19 December 2018 19: 37
    The article is bad.
    It is absolutely incorrect to consider a ship that has fundamentally modular weapons without taking into account these weapons.
    It is incorrect to refer to the lack of modular weapons when considering the lead ship of a series with modular weapons. On what, excuse me, will you test these same modules if you do not have a test ship?
    To issue patrols in the Aden Strait for the patrol ship of the Russian Federation as the main purpose is absolutely incorrect. The fight against piracy in the Strait of Aden was not and is most likely not to be at least any important task for the Russian fleet (except for displaying the flag). Obviously, it is not worthwhile to rely on this task during the construction of the fleet.
    1. +2
      19 December 2018 20: 40
      Quote: Newone
      It is incorrect to refer to the lack of modular weapons when considering the lead ship of a series with modular weapons. On what, excuse me, will you test these same modules if you do not have a test ship?

      But is it already impossible to develop modules in parallel with the ship? So, to test them already in the process of factory tests?
      Well, how will it turn out that the designers did not fit into the technical specification and it will be necessary to expand the cell? Remind you of the epic mistake with the "Inspector" on the "Alexandrite", when it turned out that the standard unmanned boat of the complex did not fit on the TSC - and it became clear even when it was too late to change something in the hull? And now all TSCs of this project will have to carry the boat in tow to the combat exits.
      Quote: Newone
      To issue patrols in the Aden Strait for the patrol ship of the Russian Federation as the main purpose is absolutely incorrect.

      But what can you do if almost all the other tasks officially announced for him are not within the competence of the Navy? But he cannot perform naval tasks other than anti-piracy due to lack of funds for their implementation.
      1. -2
        19 December 2018 22: 04
        But is it already impossible to develop modules in parallel with the ship?

        And who told you that they are not being developed?
        So, to test them already in the process of factory tests?

        They asked the question themselves, they answered it. But what if shipbuilders screwed up, or vice versa, everything turned out well and the compartment came out of other dimensions?
        But what can you do if almost all the other tasks officially announced for him are not within the competence of the Navy?

        "The ships are designed to protect and protect the sea water area of ​​the economic zone, as well as to ensure the stability of the forces and facilities of the fleet during the defense of the basing areas. In addition, they are able to effectively solve the tasks of escort and anti-piracy activities, and perform search and rescue functions."
        And which of the above tasks are not the responsibility of the Navy?
        1. 0
          20 December 2018 06: 44
          Who is who? We have this Alyosha knows everything and knows how. Him personally everyone reports on the latest developments in the field of Moscow.))
        2. +1
          20 December 2018 14: 15
          Quote: Newone
          They asked the question themselves, they answered it. But what if shipbuilders screwed up, or vice versa, everything turned out well and the compartment came out of other dimensions?

          So if there is no living module, then with what to compare the dimensions of the compartment? With the module drawing? So "Inspector", according to the drawing, also climbed to 12700.
          Quote: Newone
          Ships are designed to protect and protect the marine area of ​​the economic zone

          The very first task is no longer the Navy. The protection of the marine area of ​​the economic zone is the responsibility of the RBM.
  31. -4
    19 December 2018 19: 38
    Why is the whole article built on pirates of the Indian Ocean? Let the owners of local traffic fight as they want. For the Azov Black Baltic Barents Japanese Okhotsk civilized patrolmen are quite a thing for themselves. According to the author’s logic, our first-rankers 1155 and 956 are not suitable for combating piracy!
    1. +3
      19 December 2018 20: 44
      Quote: Scharnhorst
      For the Azov Black Baltic Barents Japanese Okhotsk civilized patrolmen are quite a thing for themselves.

      Then they need to give BOHR and name PSKR.
      Because the naval patrol ship should be able to do well in the PLO and a little in the air defense - so as not to bend off a couple of anti-ship missiles. 22160 can not do anything of this - due to the lack of emergency fire protection, means of PLO and ZRAK, and also - the lack of space for their simultaneous installation.
      1. -2
        19 December 2018 22: 28
        Strange, but in the ship’s description: AK-176MA universal artillery mount with the possibility of hitting sea, coastal and air targets, MANPADS "Igla-S" (set of up to 8 pieces) and REP equipment. Those. in "a little air defense" The ship can already.
        "The tests of the Minotaur-ISPN-M.2 container hydroacoustic station are underway." You spoke there about the simultaneous development of modules and a ship. A module for sonar is already being developed.
        Helicopter. With all means of detection, tracking and destruction of submarines.
        Those. in PLO, this ship already knows how to at least well.
  32. 0
    19 December 2018 19: 38
    On the one hand, it is true. But on the other hand ... Border "nereys" wrote off, to replace them with something similar, with a helicopter and quite seaworthy.
    1. +2
      19 December 2018 20: 48
      Quote: doktorkurgan
      Border "nereys" were written off, for their replacement something similar is needed, with a helicopter and quite seaworthy.

      22100 project.

      2700 tons full, AK-176, MTPU with checkpoint, one helicopter. More for the PSKR and it is not necessary - all the same, most of the weapons "Nereev" went to them "dead weight".
  33. 0
    19 December 2018 20: 48
    Quote: GTYCBJYTH2021
    About the "communication ship" -sh .... the carriage is not the ship "Marshal Krylov"? ..... So type in the search engine TOGE-4,5 .... There is no secret, the truth is written ..... .. why, why and when ICBMs were launched to the maximum range in the Pacific Ocean test range .... now they are shooting at Kamchatka ..... yes, they hit .... but how far the missile will deliver the BG-It is impossible to find out, only on paper -computer calculations.

    Mindflow... belay
  34. +2
    19 December 2018 21: 02
    I think that such ships could be successfully used to protect our squadrons during long-distance campaigns (for example, the Mediterranean squadron) from enemy underwater saboteurs.
  35. +1
    19 December 2018 21: 25
    The question is, so to speak, in order to increase education. Does anyone know how competent the author of this article is in matters of the fleet? It was written by AREA with a claim to awareness, but HOW MUCH?
    1. -2
      20 December 2018 06: 46
      At the OBS level.))
    2. 0
      22 December 2018 21: 29
      Do you need an officer ID scan? BUT?

      Essentially there is something to answer?
  36. 0
    20 December 2018 01: 11
    Fleet & the quintessential power of public policy ...
    There you have it, and the iPad !!!!
  37. +3
    20 December 2018 01: 19
    Admiral Chirkov considers Russia not a sea power, but a lake-river country.
  38. +3
    20 December 2018 02: 00
    Deja vu, in front of Tsushima ..... What is happening in the Fleets cannot be called anything other than being shot! There is NO naval aviation! There are NO small anti-submarine ships and minesweepers! There are NO 1st rank ships! There are NO universal supply transports! MAPL and modern diesel NO! You can continue on ANY point! That there is either a museum, or in scanty, decisive quantities. At the same time, admirals breed different types! ANY! I emphasize, anyone! A sane person will ask the question, why? There are ready-made and rolled projects "Dagestan", admirals, but there is lobbying and banal corruption.
  39. -1
    20 December 2018 02: 19
    There are no useless ships, but there are useless article authors.
  40. -4
    20 December 2018 07: 52
    Here it is, the dirty competition for loot between USC and an independent producer in Zelenodolsk. I am 100% sure that if this ship produced USC, then this dirty article would not have been born. And here you are all bitten over because of the paid author. Look how he tried, not a day in two days you can’t blind such an article ...
  41. +3
    20 December 2018 09: 38
    Of course, our navy, except for the fight against pirates, was left with no work. AUGs plow the waters of the North Atlantic and the Pacific Ocean, the melee base near the coast of rude Mexico in the Gulf of Mexico works to its fullest, the enemy fleet does not go beyond its territorial waters. You can fight piracy. what there ....
  42. 0
    20 December 2018 10: 01
    They are capable of patrolling a 200-mile sea area and staying offshore for up to 60 days. The cruising range is six thousand nautical miles, the speed is 30 knots. (This is very worthy for ships of this displacement.) It also has a hangar for an assault boat in the aft part, so send a group of marines to inspect the suspicious vessel, and if necessary, cover their fire is not a problem for him. This kid even has aircraft on the deck (KA 27). You can talk a lot about weapons, it's just a dick, here you have an AK-176MA (76,2 mm) and a DP-65 grenade launcher, two 14,5-mm machine guns, But the main highlight is of course the possibility of installing the Gibka or Shtil-1 anti-aircraft missile systems. , as well as the well-known missiles of the "Caliber" and "Onyx" families. Navigation radar station "Pal-N" and "Positive-ME1", but even that is not all, it is equipped with means for tracking saboteurs, submarines and torpedoes, which makes it indispensable when guarding larger ships. And all this on a ship with a displacement of 1800 tons and a length of 94 meters.
    1. +1
      20 December 2018 14: 11
      Quote: ALEx NIXon
      They are able to patrol a 200-mile sea zone and stay away from the coast for up to 60 days.

      The patrolling of the economy zone is the task of the RBKhR, not the Navy.
      Quote: ALEx NIXon
      He also has a hangar for an assault landing boat in the aft, so sending a group of marines to inspect a suspicious ship, and if you need to cover them with fire, is not a problem for him.

      And this is also the task of BOHR.
      Quote: ALEx NIXon
      You can talk a lot about weapons, it's just a dick, here you have an AK-176MA (76,2 mm) and a DP-65 grenade launcher, two 14,5-mm machine guns, but the main highlight is of course the possibility of installing anti-aircraft missile systems "Flexible" or "Calm-1".

      There is nowhere to put the air-launched air defense systems - the space under the bow module in the ships ordered by the Navy is already taken.
      And the advertised "Gibka" is just MANPADS on a turret, useless even against modern helicopters.
      Quote: ALEx NIXon
      It is equipped with tracking tools for divers, submarines and torpedoes,

      Only against PDSS.
      1. +1
        23 December 2018 18: 12
        Quote: Alexey RA

        Quote: ALEx NIXon
        They are able to patrol a 200-mile sea zone and stay away from the coast for up to 60 days.

        The patrolling of the economy zone is the task of the RBKhR, not the Navy.
        Quote: ALEx NIXon
        He also has a hangar for an assault landing boat in the aft, so sending a group of marines to inspect a suspicious ship, and if you need to cover them with fire, is not a problem for him.

        And this is also the task of BOHR.


        forgive me to forgive Alexei, but this is just the case where the seas washing the Russian Federation (black, Caspian, etc.), and you are right, are the tasks of BOHR. But here’s what type of military personnel protection from the sea we can say, say, the MTO point (or, more simply, the naval base) in Tartus, or what (by analogy) can now appear in Libya (or at the end of the civil war in Yemen), etc. After all, these are no longer seas washing the RF ?!

        There is nowhere to put the air-launched air defense systems - the space under the bow module in the ships ordered by the Navy is already taken.


        ... then (at least to me) it is not yet clear why the ships laid down in the Kerch "Gulf" (as it was leaked in the press earlier) differ in size from the first ones laid down in Zelenodolsk ("... they are somewhat larger than those laid down in Zelenodolsk earlier" , as it was written in the same "flot.com"). Do you know what this is connected with? Could it be that just for the reasons you indicated, the builders, after the start of the construction of the first two (or three) ships, managed to do the work on time "on the mistakes", and on the next ones (those that are being built in the "Zaliv") will already be considered and corrected ?!
    2. -1
      20 December 2018 19: 11
      Here clever people explain to you, there is so much good stuffed into it, and there is no niche in which it would be effective. A good project, but useless - a suitcase without a handle.
  43. +1
    20 December 2018 10: 54
    In my opinion, patrol ship 22160 is quite suitable for its purpose under several conditions. It should contain the Shtil-1 launcher, the installation of which is optional (probably, in the hangar of the helicopter, and the helicopter will be outside and fly when firing). We need a Minotavr GAS and a container launcher with four 91RE1 torpedo missiles and a container launcher with four 3M-54 anti-ship missiles.
    In the anti-piracy version you need an assault armored boat, a helicopter and another ship with a helicopter. Best of all - BDK to save the crews.
  44. -1
    20 December 2018 11: 44
    It can be seen from the article that the author is not new to naval issues, and the article itself is quite informative. But then it turns out that there is no naval shipbuilding in Russia ?! Perhaps these ships are entrusted with the task of controlling the Azov and Caspian seas?
  45. 0
    20 December 2018 11: 51
    Do not bother to cut the budget ... but you hold on!
  46. +1
    20 December 2018 12: 23
    The position of the author is interesting but one-sided. I would like for the assessments to consider a wider range of issues of built ships.
    1. The export potential of this ship. price / quality opportunities to drive third world countries like Zimbabwe. Sorry to build 6 and 24 ships, this is different in the sense of "recouping the money invested."
    2. Retention of personnel in the USC and "stuffing cones" with newcomers, not those ships that are possible by the year 20 will be laid. Sorry, but it is obvious that the power plants for any corvette are still being finished, they are not in nature (I mean dozens of production). Yes, this project should have been left "for later", but "then" the food stubbornly to the right.
    What further will we disperse all the plants, and after that we will poke at the government that it could not save the industry? And in that case, why are you better?
    3. It is necessary to be a little unbiased when writing an article. Are there similar ships in other countries? What tasks do they perform, what can be adopted? Who would buy this "miracle"?
    4. Had a short contact with people who conducted anti-piracy activities. So you will be greatly surprised by their motivation. If necessary, they will go to oaring pelvis. Believe me, they can handle the pitching stomachs and the vestibular apparatus there, not like civilians. By the way, the photo inspection "according to the rules" does not show any waves of 4-6 meters.
    P.S. The main understanding of the fact that the Russian Federation is temporarily simply not able to build corvettes. Dot. hi
  47. +2
    20 December 2018 14: 16
    It is known that Peskov's daughter was going to deal with or is engaged in "legal proceedings". The same one?
  48. 0
    20 December 2018 14: 50
    One Timokha saw that everything was very bad in the Navy! Ask him, why ??? They (the Navy) are not commanded by Timokh !!!
  49. 0
    20 December 2018 16: 38
    Mb sell them to anyone?
  50. +1
    20 December 2018 17: 05
    This ship is as anti-piracy as I am a balleron. High speed, DSL on board, stealth, a helicopter (most likely in the landing assault variant, all this suggests that the ships are being built for the MTR. And the public is talking about pirates.
  51. 0
    20 December 2018 19: 03
    Having read what a proposed ship to fight pirates should look like and have on board, I remembered one bearded joke. The aircraft commander announces: dear passengers, our new aircraft has a thousand first class seats and five thousand economy class seats. In the left wing we have a restaurant and a swimming pool, in the right wing there is a golf course and a gym, in the tail there is a mosque, a church and a synagogue. And forgetting to turn off the microphone, he quietly says: now let’s try to take off with all this crap.
    Okay, there's a morgue and a prison on board. It's buulshit. Here's a 14,5 machine gun for controlling the disembarkation of an inspection team on board a helicopter, it's just super! The author also forgot about providing this machine gun with MDZ cartridges. Then there will be no need to remove the inspection team after one or two bursts.
    And so yes. Great maritime powers such as Denmark, Singapore, Indonesia, they build well and correctly. And our admirals. They are like non-brothers, exclusively graduates of TVTKU. And not former Nakhimovites with a subsequent ascending ladder to the Academy of the General Staff.
  52. -2
    20 December 2018 19: 43
    Of course, to adequately assess what the author of the article has said, at a minimum, we need knowledge of the general strategic tasks of the Russian Navy in the areas of responsibility. Well, in some places some detailing wouldn’t hurt. And since we don’t know them, our indignation cannot be fully adequate. The tasks of individual ships cannot be considered separately either - they were and will be complex and are always fully linked to the actions and capabilities of other forces and means of the country, which protect and interact with each other. I believe that all actions of the leadership of the military-industrial complex, the Russian Defense Ministry, and the country as a whole are as calculated as possible in all necessary parameters. Well, believe me, officials will not order “unnecessary” ships for the Navy and waste resources that the country has limited.
  53. +2
    20 December 2018 20: 03
    Just think about how the air defense and missile defense of our country’s new warship is provided!
    - “For air and missile defense, in addition to the artillery installation, it is planned to use Igla-S MANPADS.”
    It’s sad that the patrol boats of Project 11356, which the fleet needs, are sold to India, and similar boats are bought in series for public money. Are there any reasonable people among those who make such decisions?
    1. 0
      24 December 2018 19: 15

      Just think about how the air defense and missile defense of our country’s new warship is provided!

      Eco You have enough for a corvette, to directly solve the missile defense problems?! Is not it too much ?
      It’s sad that the Project 11356 patrol boats needed by the fleet are being sold to India, and similar boats...
      About 11356 R/M, I agree with you directly. It is really sad that the most mature ships are sold to India and not built for their Navy. But, alas, this is an opportunity to receive foreign currency earnings, and, whatever one may say under the conditions of sanctions, there is a reason for the military-industrial complex.
      1. 0
        7 January 2019 23: 30
        Vladimir, I probably don’t agree with you, if you follow your logic, then on the corvettes of project 20380, 20385, “Igla” is also sufficient..
        1. 0
          8 January 2019 00: 05
          Quote: AREOPAG23
          Vladimir, I probably don’t agree with you, if you follow your logic, then on the corvettes of project 20380, 20385, “Igla” is also sufficient..
          No, not enough, but firstly, "Redoubt" made this project insanely expensive (for a ship of its intended purpose, the main one of which is anti-aircraft missiles), and secondly, it is also "partially incapable" (in fact, up to 40- 50 km). At 20380 and "Shtil-1" it would be, as they say, "beyond the edges", but its cost would not increase so much, while effectively covering the same range of hitting targets with SAMs! And now a possible way out, to try to save the Redut (for a control center with a full range of missiles of 120-135 km), is to try to get the Zaslon MF radar to work with it, and this means once again making a corvette, which now costs 17. . (with kopecks) billion, per unit, even more expensive. But it’s not a fact that it will work...
  54. Ham
    0
    20 December 2018 21: 02
    It’s perfect for protecting the naval base in Tartus ;)
  55. -1
    20 December 2018 22: 05
    In general, this will definitely be the most used series of ships. By the way, I hope that they will also order six of these for the Pacific Fleet. Still, don’t send them from the Black Sea Fleet to the Pacific Ocean. request
  56. +1
    21 December 2018 11: 12
    From the point of view of a naval officer, this ship is, of course, stupid. The construction of the series was pushed into the program by shipbuilding industrialists when there was confusion and vacillation in the leadership of the Navy. Dreams that someday some modules will be installed there are a scam. It is appropriate to “stick” the modules on civilian ships according to mobilization plans. The only option is to persuade the FSB to take over the entire series after minor alterations. I generally approve of the article.
    1. 0
      26 January 2019 00: 45
      Thank you. There are already reviews from those who sailed on this monster: at 20-21 knots in calm water there are impacts on the bottom, in the bow.
      And this is just the beginning.

      And the confusion and vacillation, unfortunately, did not end.
  57. The comment was deleted.
  58. -2
    21 December 2018 15: 13
    Let's do what the author did not do - consider the use of Project 22160 in a possible World War. In order not to miss the first disarming strike of the United States and NATO (or to weaken it), the Russian Federation must, according to its Military Doctrine, launch a Preventive Strike (June 22, 1941 must not happen again!). The system of this strike will ideally include ships of project 22160. Only one module with cruise missiles is needed. Ships can be stationed near AUSs in the Mediterranean Sea (base in Syria, and maybe in Libya), the Baltic (Kaliningrad), and the Persian Gulf (Iran). Still working and tracking, targets are clearly visible. The reason for being in the Persian Gulf is the fight against pirates. Etc. 22160 is cheap and smart. Well, shoot 8 missile launchers with nuclear warheads point-blank at the AUS, with its hundreds of missile launchers aimed at the Russian Federation.
  59. 0
    22 December 2018 14: 15
    You can even carry a suitcase under your arm if it is filled with zircon in a gold frame.
  60. 0
    22 December 2018 15: 29
    The patrol personnel will have to deal with armed people, and a long stay in exhausting pitching will have a very negative impact on the ability of those same Marines to conduct combat operations. In addition, taking off and landing a helicopter in such a wave from a small ship raises serious doubts.


    During a multi-month anti-piracy operation, personnel must always be combat-ready, and even if a storm does not allow boats to be launched, it should not interfere with getting a helicopter into the air and taking it back. And for this the ship must be large.


    The crew must be replaced by air. Bring and take away. Shifts, not months-long psychological tests.

    And against pitching, you need to install gyroscopic stabilization on the ship.
  61. 0
    23 December 2018 01: 29
    It is not clear why an outdated large (ocean-going) warship, which no longer has military significance, should be used as an anti-piracy ship. You can even buy something suitable abroad. The main thing when selecting a candidate is to maintain a balance between size and cost of maintenance. As a partner, he needs a floating prison, in which the entire law enforcement process can be organized, from the detention procedure to serving the sentence after the trial, and, most importantly, a ship specially prepared to hold a large number of people.
    In 1990, the US government bought a disabled British landing ship, which became the basis for such a future prison. Including the purchase and remodel, Vernon C. Bain cost $161 million (35 million more than expected). The Vernon C. Bain is 190 meters long and 38 meters wide. The ship has 14 hulls and 100 cameras. There are 800 beds in total, although more can be accommodated. The idea of ​​a prison ship itself is not new - there are many centuries of its practical application. In general, pirates and terrorists will serve their sentences in fairly good conditions, although the silhouette of the “Themis of the Seas,” constantly looming after them on the horizon, will unnerve them on board the captured ships much more than the anti-piracy ship itself.
    1. 0
      26 January 2019 00: 46
      It is not clear why an outdated large (ocean-going) warship, which no longer has military significance, should be used as an anti-piracy ship.


      Because there is no money to be made with such a scheme.
      1. 0
        26 January 2019 00: 55
        Because there is no money to be made with such a scheme.

        Repairs, modernization, improvement of conditions for serving sentences for prisoners and accommodation for crews - these activities, like the construction of roads, can be carried out endlessly... which is why it is strange that they did not create such a mini-fleet under the wing of Interpol.
  62. 0
    23 December 2018 11: 06
    crests confused him with “Admiral Grigorovich” near the Kerch Bridge. There is already the result of his work
  63. 0
    24 December 2018 16: 08
    I was thinking about something else... Isn’t there a shitload of billions to play catch-up with the blacks on the tins?
  64. 0
    28 December 2018 22: 43
    I, of course, can agree with the author that the ship, which in Soviet times would have been called PSKR with a stretch (PSKR actually had hydroacoustics), is being built for the Navy, looks somewhat... strange. The explanation seems to be very simple. After 2014, it is not considered possible to build full-fledged corvettes for the Navy. Therefore, they build what they can. And at the same time it is cheaper to use in everyday tasks - protecting the economic zone from ordinary violators. In the event of hostilities, the ships will be rearmed, and not necessarily only due to the module. AK-306, Bending, containers for Uraniums - for all this you just need to allocate space and displacement reserves in advance. On its own shore, it will do just fine. Do you remember the fishing trawlers “armed” with 45 boats? The helicopter itself can carry a lot of things. You shouldn’t forget about this either.
  65. Vqq
    0
    29 December 2018 00: 41
    One can only guess what tasks this ship was intended to serve. Apparently the Navy was once again trying to make a universal small-displacement ship and, as usual, tried to set the tasks as for a destroyer, and set the displacement as for a boat. I should note that there is no need to understand the modularity of this project as the ability to quickly replace one weapon module with another during operation. Here (as well as on other projects for the Navy), modular design is an opportunity, within the framework of one project, to obtain a ship with a different range of tasks to be solved when installing the appropriate modules during the construction of the ship or during planned modernization. So if the corresponding modules have not been created now, they will most likely be installed only on one of the next serial cases. By the way, Project 20380 also has a modular design and on the first hulls, for example, Uran and diesel engines were installed because there was nothing else, although there should be Caliber and gas turbines and they are provided for by the design. Of course, I would like to see a large series of corvettes or frigates, but we must understand that with the complete loss of Yuzhmash, we found ourselves without energy for such ships and only now have we made a little progress in terms of creating it ourselves, because this is a very expensive business. If not for this circumstance, then back in the early 2000s, Project 12441 would have been built and completed, and this is a truly universal ship in the ocean zone with a minimum displacement and a full set of necessary weapons and weapons. This is where the legs grow from the rather flawed version of Project 20380, and the limited series of export 11356, and delays with new frigates, and much more. So we have to load the shipbuilders with what can actually be built at this stage
  66. The comment was deleted.
  67. 0
    2 January 2019 09: 59
    the fact is that an ambitious task has been set, the Russian Navy should become the second fleet in the world after the American https://tsargrad.tv/news/putin-vmf-rossii-dolzhen-stat-vtorym-po-sile-k-2030-godu_75678
    but it is not clear how to achieve this, most likely the path of quantitatively increasing the vessels was chosen, what are their combat capabilities, question ten, what they will do is not a question at all, the main thing is that they are
    Regarding modular launchers, some have confused them with launchers disguised as ordinary containers, since modularity means the use of different ammunition from one module, but this disguise confuses me more, as it does not fit with the rules and customs of warfare according to which the military does not have the right to carry weapons concealed, to hide their nationality, that is, to wear civilian clothes without identification marks
    for this they will face a military tribunal and execution, since the rights of prisoners of war will not apply to them
    But what about containers like these? this gives the enemy the right to sink all container ships indiscriminately
  68. 072
    0
    6 January 2019 18: 43
    There is only one question: how much does it cost to have corvette 20380 in the Gulf of Aden for six months, and how much does it cost to have a patrolman for the same time? When calculating, please take into account the allowance of the entire crew, the allowance for being in combat service, the price of food and fuel. I think the difference will unpleasantly surprise you.
    1. 0
      14 January 2019 17: 57
      According to the technical specifications for 22160, the difference should be at least two times. And considering that 20380 sails with a tanker, more is possible.
    2. 0
      26 January 2019 00: 49
      Why is this even necessary? Isn't it simpler:
      1. Legalize PMCs and blame anti-piracy on them?
      2. Extend the responsibility of the FSB to anti-piracy activities?
      3. Build a pair of normal patrol ships from bulk carriers or container ships, at the price of 1/6 of one 22160, which can easily fit everything needed for such expeditions?
      1. 072
        +2
        26 January 2019 07: 29
        Will we build a base in China and South Korea by investing in their industry? God forbid the FSB will deal with terrorists in Russia. There is a proposal to appoint you responsible for passing the law on PMCs through the State Duma, I think in a month your ardor will fade
        1. 0
          26 January 2019 09: 21
          I know perfectly well what the attempts to push through the law on PMCs turned into and how they ended, don’t be smart. And it was not the State Duma that wrapped it up.
      2. 0
        4 February 2019 21: 46
        I completely agree with the first two points, but the third one howls out laughter: “Build a couple of normal patrol officers from bulk carriers or container ships” and borrow a couple of yachts from Abramovich... Our dear you! Well, you didn’t serve in the navy, so remain a pure theorist. A normal bulk carrier or a simple container ship (have you even seen them?) cannot become a “normal” patrolman!!!! I fell out of my chair, imagining a “normal” container ship chasing feluccas! For God's sake, don't make the audience laugh - the positive effect of interesting facts and even controversial ideas is lost.
  69. -1
    4 February 2019 19: 31
    How useless?!. Those. The author understands the doctrine of a future war at sea better than the General Staff and he knows better how it is planned to use certain ships in the upcoming conflict!? Doesn't the author take on too much?!
  70. 0
    13 November 2021 18: 19
    Building such useless ships is at least a betrayal.

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar people (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned), Kirill Budanov (included to the Rosfinmonitoring list of terrorists and extremists)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev Lev; Ponomarev Ilya; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; Mikhail Kasyanov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"