The fleet is following the DOSE

Information is primarily what the media bring to the consumer. This is a postulate. Information in the media can radically differ from what actually exists, and this will not even be a lie. It’s just “such a method of presentation” or facts so interpreted by an expert.


Here we take the business newspaper “Vzglyad” and the material of shipbuilding engineer Alexander Shishkin.

Russia begins to revive a full-fledged ocean fleet.



The article, to put it mildly, is mega-optimistic. I will make many quotes on purpose, with subsequent analysis, since the topic is relevant, but ... But what the “shipbuilding engineer” writes, to put it mildly, is not true.

"The naval shipbuilding program is optimistic among experts."


Which country, such and experts. I don’t know for whom what is happening in our shipbuilding can cause optimism, except for the category of people who do not care what topic to shout “cheers” on. The fact that we can still build nuclear submarines and missile boats, of course, makes us very different from Ukraine, but ...

“After a long hiatus, Russia resumes the construction of warships capable of operating in the far sea and ocean zones and projecting force into remote areas of the oceans.”


Interesting saying. “Projection of power” - so in the Soviet era, handsome men like “Atlantes” and “Orlanes”, surrounded by destroyers, seem to be, and American AUGs, just in case, begin to work out options for withdrawal.



Alas, in fact, everything is sad. We are not talking about such ships. It’s not even about building ships.

This is - attention - about the PLANNED LAYING of the ships.

That is, we (“Vzglyad” - our newspaper, which means we) have already reached the point where in joyful messages we do not start from facts that have happened such as the bookmark of the ship that took place, but from the PLAN for the bookmark.

Forgive me generously, but in our country, even laying a ship is not a guarantee that it will be launched and moreover will go into operation. How many were cut on the stocks?

But once you need a break, it means we will joyfully jump from what we planned.

Most importantly, no liability. The plan can be moved to the right, down, pushed into the far corner and put aside in a long box. And that's fine, it's a plan! The main thing has been done; the loud-voiced “Hurray!” Rushes over the paper-electronic waves.

Moving on.

"Of greatest interest are plans to create warships of the main classes - submarines, frigates, corvettes and universal landing ships (UDC)."


I’ve thought all my life that the main classes are yes, submarines, and with them aircraft carriers, cruisers, destroyers, well, frigates.

Corvettes and landing ships - how is it? Is it because we can build them? And why, then, aren’t in the main classes of missile boats, diving bots and multi-merry yalov?

If we are talking about a distant sea or ocean zone, excuse me, what corvettes? Frigates, who, according to our classification, are former patrol ships, back and forth, will fit the role of an ocean escort for large ships, but corvettes ...

Okay, let's go in order, as in the article.

Nuclear submarines


It's silly to argue with this, they are all Boreas and Ash trees, this is a long arm capable of weighing down a terrible plop. And the more there will be SSBNs and APKR in our navythe calmer you can feel. It is wonderful that we have not forgotten how to make such ships, God forbid, to build them all further on Sevmash.

However, I note that the Premier League is weapon hidden use. And “showing the flag” and other nonsense in this style is not for them. To do this, there are ancient large troughs such as "Admiral Kuznetsov" and "Peter the Great."

But yes, the more these ships will be, the less need there will be for all kinds of aircraft carriers and nuclear destroyers.

In principle, that's all. Clever in the article is over, frank pulling the owl on the globe began.

Non-nuclear submarines


It becomes more interesting. Diesel-electric submarine in the so-called "far ocean zone" - how is it? And, most importantly, why?

If you take our very own Varshavyanka (well, it’s better not to have it with us yet), which already lags behind more modern boats of potential partners, and compare its characteristics with the same Borey, then you understand that this boat is by no means for far zone. What is sea, what is ocean. And it's not even autonomy. In the speed of movement. Although in autonomy too.

This means that the part of the article that talks about diesel-electric submarines, we remove their understanding of the far ocean zone.

And here are the words about “One 677 brigade in Tartus, Syria - to ensure the self-sufficiency of the underwater component of the operational connection in the Mediterranean related to the Black Sea Fleet and to alleviate the inconvenience associated with the requirements of Article 12 of the Montreux Convention” Unfortunately, I could not translate.

Maybe our naval readers will add in the comments ...

Frigates


I start this part of the discussion and immediately end with a quote from Shishkin.

“Unfortunately, the“ two modernized frigates of 22350 ave. ”Scheduled for laying at the Northern Shipyard are not ocean 22350M with a total displacement of about 8000 tons, but only improved Gorshkovs (5400 tons).”


That is, the author admits that these ships have no relation to the DMZ. These are ordinary gatekeepers of the near field.

But:
“Nevertheless, the doubling of the 22350 series (from four to eight units) is a significant step forward on the path to restoring the surface forces of the far sea zone (DMZ).”


Well yes. And doubling the number of river buses in St. Petersburg is a notable step in the development of the Baltic Sea.

In general, the smell of the same native overpower. That is, in essence - zrada, but such ... overwhelming.

That is, again, I don’t understand how ships that under no circumstances will “operate in the far sea and ocean zone and project power onto remote areas of the World Ocean” are “a significant step forward on the way to restoration of surface forces of the DMZ”?

However, he overtook ... as is, in all its glory.

Corvettes


What corvettes have to do with DMZ, I don’t understand either. Born as a class of boats and patrol ships, even today, according to the definition, they are ships exclusively of the near sea zone.

How the tab, to put it mildly, of the absurd corvettes of the 20386 project, which have almost no positive sides, relates to the appearance of DMZ ships, is unclear.

But Mr. Shishkin splendidly poured water in the article, talking about various “if”, “possibly if” and similar conventions, without saying a word, what does DMZ have to do with it.

And the last.

UDC


There are two ways. The fact that we will still be building two UDCs, albeit not the same size as the coffins of the Mistral, but half as much, is good.

Tango with helicopter carriers.

In principle, UDC can be called a DMZ ship. Since the characteristics of the Russian UDC are not open, and all that is on them is mainly rumors and fortune telling, I will push off from the Americans.

The Yankees have a UDC group. These are the Taraws and the Wosps.



Eight of the latter are able to drag over 10 000 miles (and with refueling and supply, and even more) almost 15 000 people with everything necessary to restore order somewhere beyond the horizon.

And, you must admit, such a crowd can trample a rather large area ... in search of democracy.

But let me say that the US Navy is able to provide the most important thing: the unhindered movement of these forces at a specified distance. For this, American sailors have everything: aircraft carriers, cruisers, destroyers, frigates, submarines.

Shishkin is indignant, they say, it’s bad that in terms of tonnage our UDC (if I repeat, they will be at all) are inferior to everyone in the world.

Apparently, he simply does not know that the effectiveness of the ship’s application does not depend on the tonnage at all. There are mountains of historical examples, but that is not the point.

UDC is a rather slow and defenseless ship, capable in principle of brushing off a pair of aircraft, nothing more. And he needs a cover, and quite serious. And from aviation in sufficient quantities, and from missiles, and from submarine torpedoes.

We have none of this yet. And what Shishkin says in his article is suitable for anything, but not for supporting the landing, which we will land ... well, say, in Okinawa.

On the whole, the article about the help turned out to be so fat and rich as Ukrainian borsch. And it is made according to the principle "if there is no overturn, it must be done!"

It turns out that nothing was left of the declared “grouping of ships of the far sea zone”, but there is a persistent feeling of overthinking that everything is going according to plan where it is needed.

That's just where it is necessary - well, it is completely incomprehensible.

The trouble is, since the oven will start to bake pies for us ... In general, I would like to hear something completely different from the shipbuilding engineer. For example, how we will solve the problem of the fact that we do not have the ability to build DMZ ships. How will the problem of docking large ships in the Northern Fleet be solved.

But it’s not a story about the change in the construction of the ocean fleet on the example of corvettes, diesel-electric submarines and other ships that are not quite suitable for this.

Well, we seem to be not in Ukraine yet ... Why do we need this? We need ships. Perhaps the ships DMZ and Doz, but not the stories that they will ever be with us.
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

81 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. The comment was deleted.
    1. Mikhail Drabkin 30 September 2019 08: 47 New
      • 12
      • 5
      +7
      You are writing Roman Skoromokhov
      Here we take the business newspaper "Vzglyad" ...

      -The analysis of the article and the conclusions are fair, plus to the author.
      -Corruption, arrogant nepotism and incompetence in fact among the "new generation of managers" in the USC - abound. And responsibility is too little.
      —- It is Russia's success that manufacturing specialists have retained the existing key software.

      —- I will add that Vzglyad is not a business publication such as Kommersant, Vedomosti, which you can disagree with, but in which there really is a significant dose of business information and analysis. —- “Sight ”is a patriotic informational and political Internet resource. I read, but stopped because I did not objectively analyze the situation, especially on issues of military hardware, bureaucratic inconsistencies and a change in the generation of the elite.
      —- Accordingly, rare recipes are radical, and not constructive.
      1. TermNachTer 30 September 2019 18: 22 New
        • 5
        • 3
        +2
        The article as a whole is fair, but the author somehow overlooks that the ships of the far sea zone are certainly needed, but in the current difficult situation, when there is no extra money for the fleet, you can get by with what is or is possible to build in the near foreseeable future . Indeed, in the surface ships of the Northern Fleet and Pacific Fleet, in essence, there is only one task - to ensure and cover the deployment of the PKK SN during the threatened period, for this it is not necessary to go far into the ocean, and there the Navy aviation will help them. I want to remind the author that the scientific and industrial capabilities of Russia are not at all the USSR.
      2. nov_tech.vrn 29 October 2019 15: 19 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        The question, of course, is one, which state’s patriots are the magazines of Vzglyad, and the second, about the efficiency of the Kommersant and Vedomosti. Typical yellow press and both.
  2. 3danimal 30 September 2019 05: 38 New
    • 17
    • 7
    +10
    Article plus.
    Comparing our shipbuilding capabilities with the Japanese, this ... is depressing.
    1. Chaldon48 30 September 2019 10: 25 New
      • 11
      • 2
      +9
      Dear 3danimal, tell me, in comparison with which fleet, our shipbuilding capabilities are optimistic?
      1. 3danimal 30 September 2019 11: 30 New
        • 10
        • 0
        +10
        Now I’ll find something in the list of 200 countries ..
        1. Chaldon48 30 September 2019 12: 00 New
          • 1
          • 1
          0
          Hopefully not Zimbabwe.
          1. 3danimal 30 September 2019 13: 06 New
            • 2
            • 1
            +1
            Zimbabwe, I think, surpass)
            Regarding the ability to build warships of the first rank - noticeably inferior to the United States, China, Japan (a list of countries by size of economies directly).
            1. Chaldon48 30 September 2019 13: 47 New
              • 2
              • 0
              +2
              In this case, we look like Achilles, catching up with the turtle of world progress.
            2. Zvonarev 30 September 2019 14: 19 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Well, also France, Britain to the heap. In principle, Italy and Canada, if they strain, will also get around. Well, Germany and the Netherlands are somewhere at our level, if you do not take the SSBN.
              1. 3danimal 30 September 2019 14: 46 New
                • 4
                • 0
                +4
                Which of them will build a new PD-50 for us? )
      2. Fedor egoist 30 September 2019 23: 53 New
        • 2
        • 2
        0
        Quote: Chaldon48
        tell me, in comparison with which fleet, our shipbuilding capabilities are optimistic

        We leave Mongolian with the Belarusian fleet behind! laughing
  3. Earthshaker 30 September 2019 05: 45 New
    • 14
    • 4
    +10
    "Do great without promising great" ©
    They don’t know how to do this, apparently.
    1. Narak-zempo 30 September 2019 08: 37 New
      • 12
      • 2
      +10
      Quote: Earthshaker
      "Do great without promising great" ©
      They don’t know how to do this, apparently.

      Here another winged expression is more appropriate.
      "Crowed, but at least do not dawn."
      laughing
  4. Same lech 30 September 2019 05: 50 New
    • 10
    • 9
    +1
    Money is needed ... a lot of money for the construction of not only aircraft carriers but also means of covering it, and most importantly, to scientifically substantiate and prove ... why do we need aircraft carriers at all.
    So far, at Tartus, our aircraft carrier ship has sunk two fighter jets and even got kneaded ... the beginning is not very encouraging. what
    1. Trotil42 30 September 2019 09: 35 New
      • 9
      • 1
      +8
      Need money? HA ... We have a budget surplus ... the past has not been executed .. trillions of rubles have remained unused ... Sea-ocean money ...
    2. A5V
      A5V 30 September 2019 14: 25 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Quote: The same Lech
      why do we need aircraft carriers at all.

      This issue on topwar alone has been discussed more than a dozen times))

      Quote: The same Lech
      Money is needed ... a lot of money for the construction of not only aircraft carriers but also means of cover

      In the open sea "means of protection" i.e. destroyers, cruisers, nuclear submarines, etc. if the enemy has aircraft carriers without cover of their own carrier-based aviation, they most often do not live very long either.
    3. Chaldon48 1 October 2019 07: 55 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      I'm afraid we have lost the experience of building large warships, one hope for the carabel that build atomic icebreakers, this is certainly not warships, but still
      .
  5. Aleks2048 30 September 2019 06: 04 New
    • 10
    • 2
    +8
    The Russian fleet has only two problems: 1. There is no normal strategy for using the fleet in a possible war. Hence, there is no normal fleet construction program. 2. Excessive variety in the available boxes and their quantity. There is really no unification, and hence the problem with ground bases and with supplies in general.
    1. Uncle lee 30 September 2019 06: 14 New
      • 10
      • 1
      +9
      And we have FOUR fleets! And they are in different parts of Eurasia! And EVERYONE needs ships!
      1. donavi49 30 September 2019 08: 21 New
        • 12
        • 2
        +10
        Well, even within the same fleet (that is, with uniform requirements) there is no unification. This is problem. For the zoo eats more money for maintenance, and repairs and services are corny require more time than if there were unified-standardized ships, even within the framework of one cluster (fleet)
  6. rocket757 30 September 2019 06: 50 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    The boom is to see how everything will develop.
    The main thing is not a country for the fleet, but a fleet for the country!
  7. The comment was deleted.
  8. alekc75 30 September 2019 07: 43 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    it’s not good to talk about our 2 ships, it was our ships built under the Union and they must be kept in working condition!
  9. Livonetc 30 September 2019 07: 49 New
    • 5
    • 2
    +3
    "The sins of others to judge you are so eager to tear - start with your own and do not get to strangers"
  10. Deathmaker 30 September 2019 07: 53 New
    • 13
    • 2
    +11
    How was that socialism different from current neo-socialism with a capitalist face?
    Then reported from thousands of tons, millions of hectares, dozens of ships.
    Now they are reporting on billions of rubles spent on designing the production of tons, hectares and ships.
    The difference in results is quite obvious.
    1. Alexey RA 30 September 2019 17: 07 New
      • 6
      • 1
      +5
      Quote: Deathmaker
      How was that socialism different from current neo-socialism with a capitalist face?
      Then reported from thousands of tons, millions of hectares, dozens of ships.
      Now they are reporting on billions of rubles spent on designing the production of tons, hectares and ships.
      The difference in results is quite obvious.

      Come on you. Ali forgot the standard practice of the days of developed socialism - to report not about works, but about disbursed funds? wink
      1. nerd.su 2 October 2019 07: 47 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: Alexey RA
        they forgot the standard practice of the days of developed socialism - to report not on works, but on spent funds?

        Only planned unprofitable enterprises could report on disbursed funds. Mastery means received and spent according to the approved estimate. That is, it is a report on the work performed in monetary terms, the keyword - completed.
  11. UVB
    UVB 30 September 2019 08: 09 New
    • 8
    • 9
    -1
    Call "Peter the Great" the old trough ?! It may not be new, but this “trough” remains the most powerful surface non-aircraft carrier ship in the world, and will be so for a long time to come.
  12. bar
    bar 30 September 2019 08: 10 New
    • 12
    • 4
    +8
    This is - attention - about the PLANNED LAYING of the ships.

    News in the future tense has long been a trend in our media. It is strange that it surprises you.
  13. Loess 30 September 2019 08: 24 New
    • 7
    • 11
    -4
    but not the stories that they will ever be with us.
    On the stories that we have everything “badly bad”, you cannot build a bright future either ... There simply will not be a desire to build.
  14. venik 30 September 2019 09: 09 New
    • 16
    • 6
    +10
    "...Which country, such and experts. .... "
    ========
    But with this - DO NOT disagree !!! And this refers to R. Skomorokhov’s article - FULL !!!
    Here is just ONE example:
    "...That is, the author admits that these ships (Project 22350 improved) have no relation to the DMZ. These are ordinary gatekeepers of the most near field.
    ------
    And what about the author (Alexander Shishkin,) wrote REALLY? And here is what:
    "... Nevertheless, the doubling of the 22350 series (from four to eight units) is a notable step forward on the path to the restoration of surface forces far sea zone (DMZ) ... "
    And indeed: only Roman Skomorokhov can consider the project 22350 ships of the MIDDLE marine zone!
    1. Povelitel_buri 30 September 2019 09: 48 New
      • 9
      • 2
      +7
      Oh, get ahead wink It’s good that at least someone else is carefully reading this scripture ...
      The novel is completely confused in the classification of ships in the far sea zone and ocean zone.
      1. venik 30 September 2019 11: 57 New
        • 14
        • 0
        +14
        Quote: Povelitel_buri
        The novel is completely confused in the classification of ships in the far sea zone and ocean zone.

        =======
        good So he also invented the concept of "Far Ocean Zone".... request
        Honestly, I don’t even know WHAT is this “fruit” ??
        Previously, there were just concepts:
        - Ocean zone: - 1000 and more (Ships of the 1st and 2nd rank (according to the classification of the USSR). Displacement - more than 5 tons (000st rank) and 1 - 1500 tons (5000nd rank)).
        - Far sea zone: - 500 - 1000 miles (Ships of the 2nd rank (from 1 to 500 tons);
        - Near Sea: 200 - 500 miles. (3-rank ships from 500 to 1 tons);
        - Coastal area,: up to 200 miles. (4-rank ships from 100 to 500 tons);
        Of course, over time, the displacement of the classes of ships (as economists say) has a "steady upward trend" .... But nevertheless, to refer project 22350 to the 4th rank is already Nonsense!!!!
        1. arkadiyssk 30 September 2019 17: 42 New
          • 2
          • 1
          +1
          Perhaps he operates on our Soviet terms, and more western? By dividing by Blue, Green or Brown water fleets? Those. recognized by all the fact that only America has a true blue-water fleet. All other strong fleets such as WB, Japan, Francine, etc. no more than green-water.
          1. Povelitel_buri 1 October 2019 11: 53 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            That's just not necessary to invent. Roman tried to use our terminology.
    2. Rakovor 1 October 2019 07: 46 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      Yeah, recently here one such "near sea zone" escaped around the world to Pacific Fleet and vice versa. Well, what, dipped, of course, a coastal ship.))
      1. Nemchinov Vl 10 October 2019 20: 36 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: Rakovor
        Yeah, recently here one such "near sea zone" escaped around the world to Pacific Fleet and vice versa.

        so Roman in essence of the article is just right. And precisely because "recently there is ONE such" ... a keyword, I have allocated to you! And yet you didn’t notice that he went around the world (just in case?!) With a sea tugboat and a logistics support vessel (apparently, what would have been something to drag back to the home port in case of breakdown. Surely even the builders insisted, because they didn’t they knew how it would go, because he was the firstborn ...)?! This does not lead you to any thoughts. In the days of the USSR, I’m wondering, each new (delivered to the fleet) BOD or Sarych went sailing "under the supervision of a tugboat and supply ship" ?!
  15. 27091965 30 September 2019 09: 32 New
    • 6
    • 0
    +6
    Which country, such and experts. I don’t know for whom what is happening in our shipbuilding can cause optimism, except for the category of people who do not care what topic to shout “cheers” about.


    Well, you can gather all your strength and build an aircraft carrier, and then what? Proudly declare that we have an aircraft carrier.
  16. Alexey Petrovichev 30 September 2019 09: 40 New
    • 4
    • 3
    +1
    Totally agree
    1. venik 30 September 2019 12: 25 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: Alexey Petrovichev
      Totally agree

      =========
      good And me too!!! drinks
  17. Mestny 30 September 2019 09: 48 New
    • 12
    • 8
    +4
    Author:
    Alas, in fact, everything is sad.

    You can not read further.
    The rest of the text is the diligent pulling of an owl on an opposition globe.
  18. Povelitel_buri 30 September 2019 09: 58 New
    • 8
    • 0
    +8
    But the words about “one 677 brigade in Tartus, in Syria - to ensure the self-sufficiency of the underwater component of the operational connection in the Mediterranean, relating to the Black Sea Fleet, and to alleviate the inconvenience associated with the requirements of Article 12 of the Montreux Convention”, unfortunately, I could not translate.

    Maybe our naval readers will add in the comments ...


    Explanation - for a submarine located in the Black Sea Fleet to be able to use the straits, it needs to go to the “repair” type to another base. The nearest such base is in the Baltic. And now a full-fledged base appears with the possibility of repairing submarines in Tartus, and you do not have to drive submarines around the whole of Europe.
  19. The comment was deleted.
    1. timokhin-aa 30 September 2019 11: 01 New
      • 5
      • 0
      +5
      Did you print Skomorokhov so?
      1. venik 30 September 2019 16: 10 New
        • 4
        • 0
        +4
        Quote: timokhin-aa
        Did you print Skomorokhov so?

        =======
        Alas, Alexander! Usually with pleasure I read Skomorokhov’s articles (and yours too), although far and ALWAYS I agree with both of you .... But today, Roman - EXCEEDED himself! I did not expect this from him !!!
        VERY DISAPPOINTING!!!
        1. timokhin-aa 30 September 2019 17: 28 New
          • 6
          • 2
          +4
          Well, he noted the fundamental point correctly - Shishkin and “Vzglyad” do not brag twice about bookmarks, but bookmark plans, which are not yet a fact that they will be realized, and which are not very smart citizens confuse with a real fleet under construction.
          1. Aristarkh Lyudvigovich 30 September 2019 17: 49 New
            • 3
            • 1
            +2
            Alexander hi In June, at the Severnaya Verf Shipyard (St. Petersburg), the body of the Strog corvette of the 20380 project was launched in working order. Corvette with the serial number 1008 was laid on February 20 2015 of the year and launched in such a low degree of technical readiness to release the open slipway. Waiting for new bookmarks drinks
            1. timokhin-aa 30 September 2019 19: 46 New
              • 4
              • 2
              +2
              It will take a long time to wait. If we talk about normal ships.
            2. bayard 1 October 2019 01: 12 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              Quote: Aristarkh Lyudvigovich
              Waiting for new bookmarks

              And what are they going to lay? 22350+ (ammunition for 24 air-raid)? Or 22350M?
              1. Aristarkh Lyudvigovich 1 October 2019 12: 07 New
                • 2
                • 0
                +2
                Most likely 22350 + (ammunition at 24 UVP). 4 ordinary frigates 22350 and 4 frigates 22350 + should replace the 8 Soviet BOD project 1155. The 20385 Agile Project Corvette was also pulled out.
                1. Artemiy_2 1 October 2019 17: 47 New
                  • 1
                  • 0
                  +1
                  rather supplement, not replace. 1155th will pull to the end
                  Well, except for Kharlamov. He has long been dead in fact
                  1. Aristarkh Lyudvigovich 1 October 2019 18: 35 New
                    • 1
                    • 0
                    +1
                    “Admiral Kharlamov” understood the spare parts for the same type of ships in Severomorsk. "Admiral Levchenko" has problems with the gas turbine, and not resolved in the near future.
              2. Nemchinov Vl 10 October 2019 20: 42 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                Quote: bayard
                And what are they going to lay? 22350+ (ammunition load at 24 air-raids)
                Yes.
                Quote: bayard
                Or 22350M?
                his project hasn’t been given birth yet ...
                1. bayard 10 October 2019 23: 11 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  Quote: Nemchinov Vl
                  Quote: bayard
                  And what are they going to lay? 22350+ (ammunition load at 24 air-raids)
                  Yes.

                  fellow
                  Yes, even such, this is a HOLIDAY!
                  Quote: Nemchinov Vl
                  Or 22350M?
                  his project hasn’t been given birth yet ...

                  Judging by the picture presented, all 48 UVP will be in front of the cabin. That is, a serious rework of the hull is not expected, only lengthening and slightly broadening and replacement of marching diesels with gas turbines ... This is good. It is right . Minimal changes to the project will speed up and facilitate / reduce the cost of construction ...
                  If the stocks under new hulls are so emphatically released, then the issues have really been resolved with the power plant.
                  Highly . I really hope for it .
                  1. Nemchinov Vl 11 October 2019 13: 22 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    Quote: bayard
                    Judging by the picture presented, all 48 UVP will be in front of the cabin. That is, a serious redesign of the hull is not expected, only lengthening and slightly broadening and replacement of marching diesels with gas turbines ... This is good. It is right. Minimal changes to the project will accelerate and facilitate / reduce the cost of construction
                    Well, probably for starters, I would like to have really collected and verified / tested at the stand / a new promising GEM, about which very little information is slipping (supposedly consisting of marching M-70 FRUs, afterburners M-90FR, and most importantly, where the problems most often arise, the real "ie REDUCER for them in metal" was created, and the question was solved with how quickly the industry can manufacture them for shipbuilders)?!
                    Quote: bayard
                    22350+ (ammunition for 24 air-raids) .... - Yes, at least such, this is a HOLIDAY!
                    YES !!! But, here I just do not understand this. Since at the moment, this is the only project (which, as it were, using the example of the "round-the-world of the first-born," showed generally positive results), and today it is a sufficient project (if you like, then the most developed one) and there are all its components which the industry is ready to provide to shipbuilders in sufficient quantities (that is, Poliment-Redut has been brought up, and there is the possibility of a rhythmic supply of Zarya-3 SJSC, and problems with the speed of assembly of gearboxes for power plants - DGTA M55R, etc. .d.), why is the Navy planning to order from the USC a total of two more 22350+ bookmarks ?! This is with the terrible shortage and needs of the fleet in the DMZ ships ?! Why do they want to load the capacities of the same “Gulf” by not bookmarking 2 more such frigates (I emphasize the most developed project), but vice versa, the bookmark immediately 2 helicopter UDC ?! After all, it is also not clear whether the GEM is ready for them ?! And why two at once, and not just one, so that according to the test results you could see the flaws / necessary improvements and adjustments to the project / and the like ?!
                    1. bayard 11 October 2019 14: 58 New
                      • 0
                      • 0
                      0
                      It seems to me that while the frigates will be built in St. Petersburg and possibly in Kaliningrad, these shipyards are ready for this task, they have experience, equipment, personnel, and logistics has been worked out.
                      Given the current famine in the DM and OZ ships, for the needs of the Pacific Fleet it would be more reasonable to build at the Amur plant, and in the long run at Bolshoi Kamen. But Amursky is completely unprepared for such a task, and so far he is trying to build only corvettes (in monstrous terms and for no less monstrous money).
                      I'm afraid that the Gulf will be the same story as with Amursky. Although this is the European part of the country with a mild climate and the remaining Soviet infrastructure, but ... personnel, technical equipment, logistics ... However, Soviet supertankers of the Crimea type were built there before, there are appropriate dock sizes ... And where else is the UDC helicopter carriers to build? Once decided, it’s better there. And two at the same time ... apparently the need is hot, and the breakdown of each bookmark can turn out to be half a year - a year. This (UDC in the Gulf) - while the words.
                      22350+ and so began to lay 2 pieces. per year, for the time being, apparently, the power plants are not keeping up with the schedule, but they seemed to promise in the future that the bookmark rate would be increased to 4 per year (maybe 2 - 22350+ and 2 - 22350M). If so, then indeed this specialization will accelerate the pace of putting ships into operation and reduce costs both in time and in money.
                      1. Nemchinov Vl 11 October 2019 23: 00 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Quote: bayard
                        With modern hunger on ships DM and OZ

                        here I am about it ...?!
                        Quote: bayard
                        It seems to me that while the frigates will be built in St. Petersburg and possibly in Kaliningrad, these shipyards are ready for such a task ...
                        It’s logical, but they’re still silent about the bookmark on “Yantar” ?! Although I agree that he is building the fastest.
                        Quote: bayard
                        for the needs of the Pacific Fleet it would be more reasonable to build on the Amur plant, and in the long term - on the Big Stone. But Amursky is absolutely not ready for such a task and so far is trying to build only corvettes

                        Again, I agree, but bookmarks in the Big Stone (even planned) have not yet been heard ?! Although there are a couple of worked out 22350+, it would seem that God himself ordered to carry out, - "... With modern hunger on the ships of the DM and OZ ..." as you previously absolutely correctly noticed.
                        Quote: bayard
                        22350+ and so began to lay 2 pieces. per year, for the time being, apparently, the power plants cannot keep up with the supply,
                        So if there are problems in the speed of assembly of the most developed power plants?!, Then where do you spray the funds at the UDC or - 22350M ?!
                      2. bayard 12 October 2019 00: 37 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        About the state of affairs in St. Petersburg and Kaliningrad shipyards you better ask Aristarchr Ludwigovich. He can even answer with a photo report on gearboxes and turbines.
                        But from the memory of communication, the issue of power plants is solved comprehensively - production facilities, stands have been created, a whole line of turbines and diesel engines has been launched into production, and, well, running gearboxes for them.
                        Right now, places are being freed up on slipways (launching corvette hulls in low readiness) for laying new frigate hulls. Judging by the pace and decisiveness of the actions, it was decided not to continue the construction of the corvettes that did not live up to their expectations, and all the forces were thrown into the construction of DM and OZ ships. Judging by the pace of preparation, no later than the beginning of next year, two more 22350+ and, possibly, a couple more landing ships of the “Modernized Gren” type will be laid, this is not counting the possibility that it will be laid in Kerch.
                        But instead of continuing the construction of corvettes, it seems that it was decided to return to the IPC system still Soviet-built from the reserve with modernization ... Such ships should be cheap in construction and operation ... and it seems to have come.
                        The 22350+ and 22350M will be built at two shipyards at the same time, and the next year or two will show whether the program went as it should, or if something hurts again.
          2. bayard 10 October 2019 23: 25 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Quote: Aristarkh Lyudvigovich
            in working order, the corpset of the Strogiy project 20380 was launched. The corvette with factory number 1008 was laid down on February 20, 2015 and launched in such a low degree of technical readiness

            It seems that all the same, a natural disappointment came in the corvettes of such a configuration and displacement. It is a pity of the effort, of course, but better late than never.
            Corvette at the price of a normal frigate and with such seaworthiness \ autonomy and ammunition ... It’s better to really free the slipway and take up normal ships, and to protect the coastal zone, put back in place the MPCs still of Soviet construction, until projects more adequate to the price and combat capabilities worthwhile appear in front of them is the BZ — providing coastal area PLO and escorts in this zone of ships and vessels of the Navy.
          3. timokhin-aa 11 October 2019 10: 56 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Which, translated into Russian, means that the deadlines for this corvette will be very delayed, and why they will lay there another grandmother said in two.
        2. Nemchinov Vl 10 October 2019 20: 40 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: timokhin-aa
          Well, he noted the fundamental point correctly - Shishkin and “Sight” do not even boast of bookmarks, but bookmark plans

          And noticed, absolutely true !!
  • Operator 30 September 2019 10: 49 New
    • 10
    • 0
    +10
    Dear VO administration, please publish the names and surnames of the authors at the beginning of the articles.
  • Old26 30 September 2019 11: 25 New
    • 9
    • 4
    +5
    Biting, Roman, biting. If only for the fleet, it would be part of the trouble. But the same is true for other positions. Worst of all, we are constantly getting used to the fact that "we have planned to create ...." and we take all this for granted.
    Here is an example of the latest information on the creation in Russia of a new Onix-M anti-ship missile with a range of 800 km. The tests have not yet begun, but in publications they speak of it as something accomplished. And in the comments - all the more - this is already a superweapon ...
  • ZAV69 30 September 2019 11: 40 New
    • 3
    • 1
    +2
    Unfortunately, it is necessary to start the acceleration of an adder called HSE and a showdown with our liberal helmsmen, otherwise nothing will come of it. They all boils down to: squeeze out more and invest in funds that are invested in the US public debt. But you can’t spend money on the development of the economy, such as corrupt officials will steal. So, if you disperse this gang, take the money from the funds (only Uncle Sam will freeze them at once with sanctions) and use the money to develop machine tools, shipbuilding and microelectronics, to control Felix Edmundovich and Lavrenty Palych from the grave, then things will go. It just will not be this unfortunately, for fiction.
    1. arkadiyssk 30 September 2019 17: 51 New
      • 1
      • 2
      -1
      Who prevents us from building ships? HSE also hinders liberals? The money has been fully allocated for about 15 years already, after 2014 it generally started to run out (with the currency of the problem, but ruble wrappers ...), there is nowhere to go, and the ships do not go beyond the factory chassis. Is it that liberals keep them in factories or "effective managers" are not effective, and liberals have nothing to do with them?
  • mik193 30 September 2019 14: 38 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    I would also like to hear how and in which direction the quality of construction and repair at domestic shipyards has changed. And before it was, to put it mildly, not ah. Imagine what's going on there ....
  • Lexus 30 September 2019 14: 48 New
    • 4
    • 5
    -1
    Bravo, Roman! good good good
    A brilliant article about the "cooling breakfasts" that we are constantly "fed". You can continue the cycle indefinitely in other areas: aviation, space, electronics ... improving the quality of life of the population.
  • smaug78 30 September 2019 15: 03 New
    • 4
    • 1
    +3
    Information is primarily what the media bring to the consumer. This is a postulate. - after this you can not read. Roman struck the bottom ...
  • Seaflame 30 September 2019 16: 29 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    Rejoice that frigates pr.22350 will be 8, not 4? 4 it was not about that at all, for the Pacific Fleet and Northern Fleet it is a drop in the bucket (2 for each fleet?). A minimum of 12 is necessary! I would be very happy about this! Our country is not capable of more (destroyers, cruisers) in the construction of surface ships, I must admit the obvious ...
    1. Nemchinov Vl 10 October 2019 20: 51 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: Seaflame
      Our country is not capable of more (destroyers, cruisers) in the construction of surface ships, I must admit the obvious ...
      why is this excuse me ?! please enlighten ... "There is no political will" or "not capable," and what is the difference ?! I beg you immediately, do not write in the answer about "lack of funds", because the amount of money that is spent "aimlessly" (as for the construction of the continuation of the Buyanov-M series, 20380 corvettes for PLO, instead of the same 11661 on their DDA-12000 chassis, endless laying of new Karakurt, clearly understanding what is already for the mortgaged and under construction industry / PAO "Star" / not in time "give birth to" power plants ... etc.)
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Petrol cutter 30 September 2019 19: 48 New
    • 1
    • 3
    -2
    Well, what can I say? I generally liked the article. It became alarming.
    Although I did not find anything in excess of the new. We need aircraft carriers and cruisers. There is no money for them. There are two scenarios. Do nothing, or try to do at least something. Beau has rusted and outdated almost everything. Tomorrow UA will have nothing to beat off from the Fleet.
    Well, somehow. hi
  • Victor Dubrovsky 30 September 2019 19: 57 New
    • 2
    • 4
    -2
    I have been writing and saying “terrible” for a long time: the RF ships of the far ocean zone DO NOT NEED, because we do not have vital interests beyond the seas and oceans. But there are monstrous and unscrupulous conditions for the survival of the population, whose means are meaninglessly spent on the stupid ambitions of the leadership ... :(
    1. nerd.su 2 October 2019 09: 03 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: Victor Dubrovsky
      The ships of the far ocean zone DO NOT NEED RF, because we do not have vital interests beyond the seas and oceans.

      What do you mean by vital interests and on what basis you say that we do not have them beyond the seas and oceans?
  • Dart2027 30 September 2019 20: 11 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    I’ve thought all my life that the main classes are yes, submarines, and with them aircraft carriers, cruisers, destroyers, well, frigates. Corvettes and landing ships - how is it?
    One can argue about corvettes, but generally landing ships have always been a separate class of ships.
    But the words about “one 677 brigade in Tartus, in Syria - to ensure the self-sufficiency of the underwater component of the operational connection in the Mediterranean, relating to the Black Sea Fleet, and to alleviate the inconvenience associated with the requirements of Article 12 of the Montreux Convention”, unfortunately, I could not translate.
    What is incomprehensible here? Yes, dizeluhi in range is not a nuclear submarine, but if they have a base in the Mediterranean, they can safely walk there without wasting time and resources on returning to Sevastopol or Novorossiysk.
    That is, the author admits that these ships have no relation to the DMZ. These are ordinary gatekeepers of the near field.
    Oh really? BMZ watchdogs in 5400 tons? This is just DMZ, and in the ocean they can walk for themselves.
    In principle, UDC can be called a DMZ ship.
    Basically? In fact, he is.
    And by the way, the author never says that corvettes and DELP
  • Tektor 30 September 2019 23: 22 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Well, it's impossible to build the entire fleet at once! You need to choose what is in the beginning and what is later, prioritizing. And it was decided at the beginning to build a submarine fleet. 6 submarines will be delivered next year. And among them - “Prince Oleg”, RPKSN pr. 955A (“Borey-A”), armed with an SLBM Bulava R-47, with twice the casting weight compared to the Bulava R-30 and a range of up to 13 km. This will be the second SSBN pr. 000A ("Borey-A") after Prince Vladimir ...
    When strategists are built, it will be possible to build surface cruisers with aircraft carriers ...
  • kit88 1 October 2019 08: 57 New
    • 5
    • 0
    +5
    And you can not insert "PEREOMOGA" through each word.
  • Vyacheslav 2 October 2019 04: 50 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    This article is superficial and one-sided, as, in fact, the article criticized by the author. I see no reason to disassemble it in detail. All presentation logic is built on sophistry. I will dwell on one example. The author introduces a false statement that frigates 22350 are ships of the near sea zone, based on a commented article. Calls them "ordinary guard." What is the meaning of the author in the concept of "ordinary guard" is not clear, but apparently he is convinced that the guard ships are BMZ ships. Hence his conclusion - Russia does not build DMZ ships. I will not focus on the round-the-world PR campaign of the frigate Gorshkov, but it seems to me that crossing 3 oceans, if it does not give him the status of an ocean zone ship, he has the right to rely on DMZ. For reference:
    Near Sea: 200 - 500 miles.
    Far sea zone: - 500 - 1000 miles.
    Ocean zone: - 1000 miles and further.
    The declared range of frigates 22350 is 4500 miles, that is, it is clearly - DMZ.
    Autonomy is also decent - 30 days (this is without the usual accompaniment of a tanker and a tugboat).
    The stumbling block for many is the possibility of using weapons in the sea. 5 points is quite enough for DMZ (and even for OZ). Thus, at the exit we have an excellent frigate DMZ, a salvo of which can sink a pair of 8X1 destroyer supersonic missiles - this is an extremely difficult task), or a pair of nuclear submarines.
  • Polar Bear 5 October 2019 00: 42 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    It is necessary to dance from the marine doctrine of Russia. In theory, such a document should be signed by the chief of staff, the commander-in-chief of the Navy, approved by the Minister of Defense and the President. In it, proceeding from the military-political situation in the world, the goals, tasks of the fleet and which ships under them are necessary in the near future for the country's defense should be spelled out. But if there is a thieving ruling "elite" with passports, real estate in NATO countries, the construction of this fleet of luxury yachts, often the most expensive in the world, it can be said that the Russian Navy, so that the admirals are not registered there in the sea doctrine , nothing shines except corvettes and frigates and what the USC is capable of, which lobbies its interests and nudges the fleet with all kinds of junk, such as the mentioned corvettes. Why Russia needs the UDC than to cover them and where to land the Marines in the current conditions, I personally don’t understand very well. But in parades and in TV shows this will look beautiful for those who are from plows, and most importantly raise the falling rating to the president.
  • Ratmir_Ryazan 5 October 2019 04: 01 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    ridiculous corvettes of the project 20386


    Yes, wait, you whine, about the "ridiculous" corvettes.

    We build corvettes and quite decent pr. 20380 (6 in formation + 4 under construction) and more powerful pr. 20385 (one on ZHI + 1 under construction), and 20386 (only 1 corvette under construction) consider it an experiment.

    It can be done to work on it all the proposed new concepts in terms of reducing visibility and the ability to make ships with different purposes in one building.

    Speech that corvettes pr.20386 will be a large series no one leads.

    Corvettes - then frigates - then destroyers - and only then cruisers and aircraft carriers. This is the only way the fleet is built and in general everything from simple to more complex, and not vice versa.

    Honestly, I don’t understand why only the whining and panic are heard about the fleet ?! Nobody attacks us today, and if they attack, we will answer from land and on land, and while we have time, we build and develop the fleet and the shipbuilding industry, so that the rest of the armed forces are not deprived of the people in poverty as well The USSR does not drive.

    The USSR had a fleet more powerful, but how did it greatly help the country? The impoverished country then changed this fleet to Pepsi Cola, and then sold it for pennies to everyone in a row - this is the price and the result of the country's ill-conceived economy.

    You cannot build a destroyer if we have not learned how to build corvettes without problems. Now, thank God, everything has worked out, all the main ship systems have been run-in, it’s also decided to work with the engines, now the shipbuilders will fill their hands on corvettes and frigates, and there we will take up destroyers / cruisers / aircraft carriers.

    And a little at approximate prices, in order to understand what a lot of money it costs us:

    RTOs - $ 150 million;
    Corvette 20380 - 250 million dollars;
    Frigate - 500 million dollars;
    DEPL - 300 million dollars;
    Nuclear submarines - 1 billion dollars.

    The annual budget of the city of Ryazan (regional center) is $ 150 million (about 10 billion rubles) = the cost of one RTO.

    1 RTOs = budget of the regional / republican center. Think about these numbers before screaming that everything is gone and demand dozens of destroyers from the country !!!

    Moreover, the fleet is not much cheaper for us than ships of the same class to the Americans and NATO. Prices are almost the same for classmates-ships, what we have, what NATO has.

    It is unclear why, but the fact that here we cannot keep up with them in quantity. Maybe if the series improves, the price drops, but I don’t think that much.
    1. Nemchinov Vl 11 October 2019 23: 25 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: Ratmir_Ryazan
      And a little at approximate prices, in order to understand what a lot of money it costs us:

      RTOs - $ 150 million;
      Corvette 20380 - 250 million dollars;
      Frigate - 500 million dollars;
      DEPL - 300 million dollars;
      Nuclear submarines - 1 billion dollars.


      then it is all the more logical to talk about the rationality of using the funds allocated for the construction of ships for the Navy. Well, probably firstly, but the cost of 22350 is still closer to 415 million dollars; and secondly, the obvious squandering is the continuation of the construction of 20380 (with its insane price, and the mismatch of the armament composition for the anti-aircraft defense in the BMZ). If instead of them, for the same purposes (and on the same modified GEM) 11661 were produced, then the construction price would fluctuate within 200 million dollars (per unit) with a more successful composition of weapons for the anti-aircraft defense in the BMZ. That is, the construction of a corvette brigade for BMZ (with the rational use of funds) will save practically the cost for one frigate ?!
      1. Ratmir_Ryazan 12 October 2019 10: 50 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        a clear squander is the continuation of the construction of 20380 (with its insane price, and the mismatch of the armament composition for the anti-aircraft defense in the BMZ). If instead of them, for the same purposes (and on the same modified GEM) 11661 were produced, then the construction price would fluctuate within 200 million dollars (per unit) with a more successful composition of the armament for the anti-aircraft defense in the BMZ.


        There is no insane price for the corvette pr.20380, corvettes of such a displacement are approximately like that of our "partners", only ours will be more powerful, especially in terms of air defense.

        And with the anti-submarine defense at Project 20380 everything is fine, unlike the patrol officers of Project 11661K Dagestan and Tatarstan, they have neither anti-submarine weapons, nor mine-torpedo weapons, nor helicopters, and lesser displacement usually leads to worse navigability.

        That's why pr. 11661, even in the maximum version, is cheaper, and not because it is more rational in design.

        I don’t think that instead of building corvettes of project 20380, patrolmen of project 11661 is a good idea. Rather, it will be stupidity and crime.

        Corvette Ave. 20380 is optimal for protecting BMZ from submarines and enemy aircraft. Project 20385 is even better, but much more expensive, and the number of calibers on it is insignificant and probably the strike of such a ship on the territory of the enemy will be weak, although here I may be wrong of course.

        Corvette is primarily a guard of its BMZ and its convoys, and frigates pr.22350 and ships of a higher rank will be hit on the territory of the enemy.

        If anything needs to be reduced, this is the construction of the Karakurt Project 22800 missile launcher, in fact it’s just a sea / river missile platform, and not cheap, in the light of the US withdrawal from the INF Treaty, these ships have lost their relevance, now it’s better to make Iskander with Caliber and range at 2600 km. They are cheaper and with the same number of launched missiles and more mobile, and masking them is easier and you can transfer them by plane.
  • turbris 30 October 2019 11: 49 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    How many times have the authors already been reminded that Russia is not the USSR, the fleet under these states has solved different problems. Russia has no plans for domination in the oceans, except for the demonstration of the flag, respectively, and the fleet is being built in accordance with the adopted naval doctrine. What do you compare with the US fleet, first look at the size of military budgets or GDP, of course everyone wants a revival of former power, but at the cost of what? You need to be realistic, the construction of the fleet goes to the means that the state is able to allocate at the moment, and you can fantasize and criticize as much as you like.