NI: Russian flurry torpedo "Flurry" is unique today

One of the most innovative underwater weapons developed by the Soviet Union was the VA-111 “Flurry” super-cavitating torpedo. In the 21st century, the general principle she demonstrated remains relevant for the Navy of the whole world.




Traditionally for underwater weapons there is a speed limit set by the environment itself. Flurry solved this problem by turning the water in front of itself into steam. Moving virtually through a gaseous medium, a torpedo collides with much less resistance, which allows it to move at speeds up to 200 nodes. This process is known as supercavitation.

Like any weapon, it has flaws. They decided to reflect on them on the pages of NI (National Interest). Firstly, the gas bubble and engine are very noisy. Any submarine that launches a super-cavitating torpedo immediately gives out its approximate location. Another disadvantage of such a torpedo is the inability to use traditional guidance systems. The gas bubble and rocket engine produce enough noise to stun the active and passive sonar system integrated into the torpedo.



Still relevant?


Meanwhile, Russian submarines are still the only ones on the planet equipped with super-cavitating torpedoes, modernized versions of the Flurry with a conventional, non-nuclear, warhead. The Russian industry also offers an export version of Flurry E.

Iran claims to have its own super-cavitating torpedo, which it calls Hoot, and which is supposed to be the same Flurry. In the 2004 year, German defense contractor Diehl-BGT announced the creation of Barracuda, a torpedo technology demonstrator designed to move high-speed ceilings to 194 nodes. However, the project was not able to demonstrate anything sane.

The Flurry, a noisy but effective weapon, breaks the old paradigm of submarine warfare, the newspaper notes. A torpedo with 200 speed knots is an attractive opportunity, as naval rivalry escalates in both the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. It is relevant even decades after the end of the Cold War.

Apparently, the article concludes, we will be able to see even more navies that are adopting super-cavitating technologies and adjusting their underwater tactics accordingly. The submarine war will become much louder and deadlier.
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

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

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Thrifty 8 October 2019 17: 01 New
    • 6
    • 1
    +5
    Well, yes, given the fact that the barrage seems to have been "taught" to maneuver both in terms of immersion depth and displacement relative to the target, the missile torpedo is still a really formidable weapon.
    1. Vadim237 8 October 2019 17: 06 New
      • 8
      • 19
      -11
      With the range that it has - in modern conditions it will not work anymore.
      1. Thrifty 8 October 2019 17: 14 New
        • 10
        • 4
        +6
        Vadim 237-you first try to sink it. ..
        1. hydrox 8 October 2019 18: 49 New
          • 15
          • 2
          +13
          And he will not try, if only because he will not be able to aim, but if he takes aim, he will not be able to ensure the speed of interception :: this is similar to Krylov’s fable “Fox and Grapes”:
          "Though he sees the eye,
          Yes, the tooth is numb! "
          There is a button on the nose in the aquatic environment, and this receiver gives an accurate signal, the processing of which gives an exact course to the target, because the Flurry is HEARING the target.
          1. Avior 8 October 2019 20: 01 New
            • 3
            • 10
            -7
            The barrage does not hear the target, this is not a homing torpedo, it does not have a seeker.
            GOS is in German Barracuda.
            The Americans also had a super-cavitating HSUW torpedo project, I don’t know how it ended, there was also a GOS
            https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/systems/hsuw.htm
            1. jjj
              jjj 8 October 2019 20: 37 New
              • 15
              • 2
              +13
              Quote: Avior
              this is not a homing torpedo

              Already induced. This, in fact, caused a surge in interest in the dashboard
              1. Avior 8 October 2019 21: 58 New
                • 2
                • 14
                -12
                Not induced and not induced.
              2. Cympak 9 October 2019 07: 57 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                Attach a reference
      2. Piramidon 8 October 2019 19: 37 New
        • 14
        • 3
        +11
        Quote: Vadim237
        With the range that it has - in modern conditions it will not work anymore.

        What exactly is "not a ride"? Well, you hear it before death, will it be easier for you in the next world?
        1. hydrox 8 October 2019 20: 11 New
          • 0
          • 4
          -4
          It is unlikely to hear :: it is supersonic ... although the question is interesting :: how to measure the speed of sound emitted by many shock waves that are not quantifiable in the interval?
          1. Avior 8 October 2019 22: 05 New
            • 5
            • 1
            +4
            Do you know what is the speed of sound in water?
            Supersonic in water is something ... smile
          2. ROSS_51 9 October 2019 00: 14 New
            • 2
            • 0
            +2
            200 knots is 370 km / h. And do you think supersonic is how much?
            although the question is interesting: how to measure the speed of sound emitted by many shock waves that are not quantifiable in the interval?

            Why do you need to measure sound, judging by your statement, supersonic torpedoes ??
            1. hydrox 9 October 2019 06: 43 New
              • 3
              • 2
              +1
              I ask the question of the speed of sound in water from a scientific point of view (for sound of a certain frequency), and you answer me from the point of view (oh!) For which the length of the measured sound wave is on the drum.
              So, the speed of sound in water is determined by many conditions for the occurrence and flow of sound in an environment that DOES NOT HAVE rupture surfaces. And only the shock wave as the velocity of the discontinuity surface has a value of 1425 m / s. The problem is that cavitation is a chaotic sequence of shock waves, and you need to know which parameter you would like to measure: the physical or thermodynamic speed of sound. laughing
            2. Cympak 9 October 2019 08: 06 New
              • 4
              • 0
              +4
              To school, learn physics! The higher the density and elasticity of the medium, the higher the speed of sound in it. And as a rule, it does not depend on the frequency and amplitude.
              In pure water, the speed of sound is about 1500 m / s and depends on the depth (pressure), temperature and salinity of the water
              At a temperature of +24 ° C, salinity of 35 ppm and zero depth, the speed of sound is about 1532,3 m / s. At a temperature of + 4 ° C, a depth of 100 m and the same salinity, the speed of sound is 1468,5 m / s].
            3. kig
              kig 10 October 2019 16: 52 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              the speed of sound in water is about 1500 m / s, and per hour - count yourself. A lot of. Gorazjo more than in the air. Why? See physics textbook.
          3. hydrox 9 October 2019 07: 17 New
            • 1
            • 1
            0
            Einsteins of local bottling immediately began to minus :: such "two bytes on asphalt" brains of these galactic geniuses refuse to perceive - "here for a beer, I would!" laughing
            1. Cympak 9 October 2019 08: 11 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              But what if a person, as it is customary to say today, has a “humanitarian mindset”? I’ve already learned to write, but I don’t know physics yet?
              1. hydrox 9 October 2019 09: 15 New
                • 3
                • 0
                +3
                He doesn’t know - half the trouble, you can force him - and he will learn ...
                But she doesn’t want to learn!
                Just think, at the USE this year, 60% chose social science - they have never seen such a shame in the world :: Nobody in Russia wants to be either a scientist, engineer, or designer, nobody wants to engage in productive work, everyone wants to be managers and designers - Russia will never generate so many office mold jobs - and managers and designers with honors will go to sell shoes and jeans at flea markets !!
                And this is good: it will not be necessary to cleanse the society of liber mold by repressive methods - they themselves will die !!! laughing
        2. Vadim237 8 October 2019 20: 40 New
          • 5
          • 9
          -4
          I'm talking about the fact that the submarine will need to come close to the warship or ships in a tight one - and they will hear the submarine for several tens of kilometers.
          1. Piramidon 8 October 2019 21: 06 New
            • 8
            • 3
            +5
            Quote: Vadim237
            I'm talking about the fact that the submarine will need to come close to the warship or ships in a tight one - and they will hear the submarine for several tens of kilometers.

            Not all and not always. DEPL project 636 "Varshavyanka" AUG of the Yankees could not detect, even when the boat in the Mediterranean Sea they practically went inside their warrant. Not for nothing that the adversaries failed her - the Black Hole.
            1. Avior 8 October 2019 21: 57 New
              • 4
              • 8
              -4
              Do not believe in these tales.
              DEPL speed is not enough to walk inside the AUG.
              Destiny DEPL ambush. They cannot walk with AUG speeds.
              1. hydrox 8 October 2019 22: 28 New
                • 3
                • 3
                0
                "And what, just what, so immediately DEPL!"
                Remember, they also chased after Lyra :: but they didn’t cover it!
                After all, the level of technology has improved: you look, and we will teach the nuclear submarines something indecent :: remember how you reacted to the “Cobra Pugachev”, and now it’s a regular element of the mandatory pilot training ... they also require that the planes automatically execute it!
                There is progress! good
                1. Avior 9 October 2019 12: 36 New
                  • 2
                  • 0
                  +2
                  how they reacted to the Cobra Pugachev, and now it’s a regular element of the mandatory pilot training.

                  Give a link, where is it?
                  For air performances, yes, I heard for deckers from Kuznetsov in order to increase the level of flight skill, but not for use ...
                  DEPL has the wrong speed, chasing AUG
                  1. hydrox 9 October 2019 13: 41 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    With this theme - for pilots :: they will explain everything to you and explain why this is what used to be aerobatics, is now used as an anti-aircraft maneuver.
              2. Piramidon 9 October 2019 10: 57 New
                • 1
                • 1
                0
                Quote: Avior
                DEPL speed is not enough to walk inside the AUG.

                Looking at what speed the AUG itself is moving. It does not always go at maximum speed (for example, when refueling). It happens that it’s even worth it.
                1. Avior 9 October 2019 12: 37 New
                  • 1
                  • 1
                  0
                  Unless, if in the parking lot, and then you still need to get to her diesel-electric submarine and go back
            2. Cympak 9 October 2019 08: 12 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              Facts in the studio
          2. hydrox 9 October 2019 06: 49 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Most likely they will not hear, even if this boat is Lira :: all ranges will be clogged with wild white noise of cavalry Flurry
    2. Honest Citizen 8 October 2019 17: 07 New
      • 17
      • 6
      +11
      As for me, everything that makes Amers "shake out of his pants" is worthy of a minimum of respect.
      And they’re not being bombed
    3. GRF
      GRF 8 October 2019 17: 20 New
      • 6
      • 0
      +6
      Quote: Thrifty
      Well, yes, given the fact that the barrage seems to have been "taught" to maneuver both in terms of immersion depth and displacement relative to the target, the missile torpedo is still a really formidable weapon.


      and what will happen when he is taught to fly out of the water, as an option for course adjustment, and re-immersion ...
      1. Cympak 9 October 2019 08: 14 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        This is called a rocket torpedo. And they have already been around for a long time, both with us and with them: Subroc, Flurry, Caliber
        1. GRF
          GRF 9 October 2019 23: 16 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: Cympak
          This is called a rocket torpedo. And they have already been around for a long time, both with us and with them: Subroc, Flurry, Caliber

          I do not mean the launching of the rocket from under the water (and the final immersion), but reusable “diving” when moving towards the target ... (although most likely they will come up with other ways to adjust the rate of the fired torpedo)
    4. Chaldon48 8 October 2019 17: 57 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      It turns out in the case of a torpedo high speed is everything?
      1. Lexus 8 October 2019 19: 28 New
        • 4
        • 3
        +1
        Vadim, all means are good in the complex. Detection systems, a powerful surface and underwater fleet, proven tactics of application and determination to use all this when necessary is the key to success. Flurry is not a panacea, but just one of the remedies. In my opinion, his destiny is a decisive dagger strike. More specifically, let's say two opposing squadrons met in the ocean, exchanged air strikes and anti-ship missiles, which is unlikely to cost loss and damage on both sides. Maneuvering begins, preparation for a second collision and ... rescue of damaged and sinking ships. Can you imagine the noise background? At this moment, the submarines intervene. Here is the best time to use the "Flurry" with JBCh. The enemy will not have time to run away, confuse the missing guidance system and intercept an underwater projectile approaching at a speed of more than 300 km / h, too. And the defeat of the submarine carrier, if it does happen, will not solve anything.
        1. hydrox 8 October 2019 20: 17 New
          • 3
          • 0
          +3
          And it is not a fact that the carrier carrier will be defeated in that hustle: after all, it is unlikely that anyone in this roar will be able to determine the source of the super-sound and even more so identify it with the escaping submarine in the background of the explosion of nuclear warheads - it just will not happen.
        2. Chaldon48 9 October 2019 09: 48 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          I understand that a torpedo alone doesn’t solve anything, but at the solver a loud noise can play the role of a smokescreen, and we and the enemy will simply “go deaf” for a while, and at this time you can make a dodge maneuver?
          1. Lexus 9 October 2019 12: 33 New
            • 0
            • 2
            -2
            I think if the “business” described above can be “cranked up", there will be incomparably greater opportunities and reasons to survive)
          2. hydrox 10 October 2019 09: 43 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Why doesn't it solve?
            Just one Flurry is enough to stop the AUG mission and disband it. And then :: we don’t even imagine the filling and the possibilities of “Flurry-M” and “Flurry-M2”
            1. Chaldon48 10 October 2019 11: 18 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              You mean that Shkval-M2 can have a special filling, then it is curious at what maximum distance from the carrier this filling can be put into action?
              1. hydrox 10 October 2019 13: 31 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Most interesting, but secret to death.
    5. Avior 8 October 2019 20: 03 New
      • 2
      • 1
      +1
      A flurry can, after launch, perform one turn at an angle of up to 20 degrees, to form a torpedo salvo, but this is not maneuvering and, especially, not homing.
      1. hydrox 10 October 2019 09: 45 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Do not invent your data 30 years ago, but work on the Squalls is ongoing ... even pedovikia does not deny this. laughing
      2. Chaldon48 10 October 2019 21: 13 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        And at what distance is this torpedo designed for?
    6. jjj
      jjj 8 October 2019 20: 44 New
      • 5
      • 0
      +5
      Quote: Thrifty
      rocket torpedo

      "Flurry" is named missile torpedo on Wikipedia. "Flurry" high-speed torpedo. The rocket torpedoes were Waterfall. The launch was carried out from a boat through a torpedo tube. Then the rocket came out of the water and flew with the help of a solid-fuel engine. After the flight phase, it was immersed in water and approached the target as a torpedo or warhead (UBF) unit was set up as an underwater mine
  2. dirk182 8 October 2019 17: 03 New
    • 10
    • 1
    +9
    On VO articles went .... cause a sense of deja vu.
  3. gx200gx 8 October 2019 17: 23 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Any weapon has both shortcomings and advantages. An ideal, without flaws has not yet been created - the question is which side is the advantage? And since it is still relevant, it means more pluses! And the most important thing is speed!
    1. Cympak 9 October 2019 08: 21 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Main cons:
      1. You need to be able to get into the maneuvering target
      2. The boat gives the enemy its position at close range, which deprives it of its main advantage.
      They have been trying to sell Flurry for export for a long time, but no one takes it. Why? Because, probably, the sense in its application is only with YaBCh.
      1. hydrox 10 October 2019 08: 13 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        1. The AUG order does not maneuver during the campaign and during the campaign (if it maneuvers, this means that the boat has been detected).
        2. If the boat gives out its location, then this is already scrap metal lying at the bottom.
        3. But if the boat is in ambush, or it is the “Black Hole”, then the fun begins:

        1. If the boat launches, then the entire district with a radius of at least 20 km is filled with white cavitation noise, which cannot be detached - ALL acoustics ceases to function for a period of about 140 seconds. (until Flurry pokes its nose into the side of the aircraft carrier).
        2. If this is followed by a large "Bara-boom", then this means that the AUG has ended its mortal existence.
        3. If the Flurry is used as a deterrent, the aircraft carrier goes for a 1-2-year repair (if the Flurry makes a through hole from side to side (without warheads, only as a kinetic projectile)), or for 5-7 years, if there is a fire (if it gets into the fuel and lubricants warehouse, or BC).
        4. In 2,5 minutes of noise and the subsequent recovery time, the GAS nuclear submarine can leave (the squadron will not be at all up to it !!).
  4. Observer2014 8 October 2019 17: 24 New
    • 15
    • 6
    +9
    NI: Russian flurry torpedo "Flurry" is unique today
    Of course it is unique. It would be even more unique if it were a small underwater drone’s weapon. Specialists and those who understand this will understand me. A flurry is not a long-range weapon. And it’s not controllable. And it’s not always possible to use submarines. But here’s how the weapon underwater drone. The most what you need.
    1. Ross xnumx 8 October 2019 18: 06 New
      • 5
      • 2
      +3
      Quote: Observer2014
      Of course it is unique. It would be even more unique if it were an underwater small-sized drone weapon.

      good Almost removed from the tongue. The main thing is that you can donate an underwater drone, and its price is incomparably cheaper than a nuclear submarine.
      For everyone who spits on the engineering idea of ​​Soviet designers forty-two years ago, I can clarify that the power of 150 kt is designed specifically for clumsy American floating airfields, the course of which is easy to calculate, and maneuverability leaves much to be desired. By the way, the explosion of such a torpedo does not require an exact hit:
      Undermining a nuclear torpedo within a radius of 500-1500 meters from the target will cause significant damage to the enemy ship and cause serious damage. An electromagnetic pulse can hit an onboard device of an enemy ship. In any situation, after a nuclear torpedo strike, an enemy ship will have to go for repairs.
      Well, with a direct hit by a nuclear torpedo, there will already be nothing to repair.

      But in relation to "Flurry" it is worth using the term - "Soviet development":
      November 29, 1977 anti-submarine complex "Flurry" was adopted by the Navy of the USSR. Initially carried a nuclear warhead of 150 kt, subsequently created an option with a conventional warhead with autonomous control, without homing.

      hi
      1. Avior 8 October 2019 20: 11 New
        • 3
        • 3
        0
        With the maneuverability of aircraft, far from being as bad as it seems, looking at their size

        And the course to calculate them will be a serious problem ...
        1. bar
          bar 8 October 2019 20: 45 New
          • 10
          • 3
          +7
          Nothing special. In the video, not so much an aircraft carrier maneuvers as a helicopter with a camera flies around it. And yes, he has a decent roll. If there are planes on the deck ready to launch, he will not be able to maneuver.
          1. Avior 8 October 2019 20: 58 New
            • 3
            • 1
            +2
            There is a wake trace, by which you can estimate the radius of circulation. With 40 seconds. It is in full swing.
            Extremely manoeuvrable ship for its size
            1. bar
              bar 8 October 2019 21: 02 New
              • 6
              • 0
              +6
              For its size, yes. But dodging torpedoes by such a maneuver is a stupid occupation.
              By the way, if you look closely at the wake track, you can see that between the next circulations there are decent destinations of the direct track. Due to the large moment of inertia, a decent time passes for this colossus to begin the maneuver after turning the helm.
              1. Avior 8 October 2019 21: 08 New
                • 3
                • 5
                -2
                From non-self-guiding, quite real
                1. bar
                  bar 8 October 2019 21: 15 New
                  • 4
                  • 1
                  +3
                  Well, what are we going to argue here. Practice is the best criterion of truth. Wait and see. But I do not believe that in the event of a torpedo attack, this colossus will suddenly drop everything, stop taking off / landing, have time to fix the planes on the deck and begin to maneuver, scare away the neighbors in the AUG.
                  1. Avior 8 October 2019 21: 36 New
                    • 2
                    • 5
                    -3
                    In the event of a torpedo attack, the aircraft carrier will certainly maneuver, not paying attention to the possible fall of aircraft from the deck.
                    It is obvious.
                    I will add that the probability of an attack during take-off and landing is not very high
                    1. bar
                      bar 8 October 2019 21: 40 New
                      • 3
                      • 0
                      +3
                      In the event of a torpedo attack, the aircraft carrier will certainly maneuver

                      If he has time to start doing it in those 1-2 minutes of the “flight” time of the flurry. I think that this colossus has just begun to maneuver, it takes a lot more time.
                      1. Avior 8 October 2019 21: 49 New
                        • 1
                        • 6
                        -5
                        To shift the steering wheel is a matter of five seconds.
                        I think evasion from a torpedo attack is practiced there by apprentices, and repeatedly
                      2. Brylevsky 9 October 2019 03: 45 New
                        • 2
                        • 0
                        +2
                        Quote: Avior
                        To shift the steering wheel is a matter of five seconds.

                        What angle? I’m a sailor, if my memory serves me right, then shifting the helm “from side to side” (from 35 degrees of one side to 30 degrees of the opposite) should take ... no more than 27,5 seconds. This is purely a change in steering angle. The course change itself will take an incomparably longer time, given the inertial characteristics of such a target as an aircraft carrier. Unfortunately, I don’t remember all the maneuverable elements of one of the container ships that I had to work with, but with a displacement of about 100 tons and a speed of 000 knots, the tactical diameter of the circulation was about 25 cables, and this maneuver took time ... I don’t remember exactly ... 6-3 minutes, depending on the state of the sea.
                        PS I also do not share the enthusiasm for this torpedo. In my opinion, this is a suicide weapon: the boat that used it will unambiguously give its location to the AUG ships, and given the number of ships in a travel order, several bearings will be taken immediately, which will lead to a guaranteed determination of the position of the shooter. That is, the guys are most likely to be assigned “heroes,” but they will already be “heroes posthumously.” I consider it my duty to remind all respected readers: world history already knows such examples, these are Japanese pilots ("kamikaze") and sailors ("Kaiten"), with the only difference being that there were a lot of Japanese pilots and planes. Until a certain historical moment.
                      3. Avior 9 October 2019 05: 55 New
                        • 2
                        • 3
                        -1
                        That is, from a direct position no more than 13 seconds. But no more- sly category.
                        This is from zero to 13.
                        Again, civilian ships or ships? Surely there is a difference.
                        This is not the only video on the network in which the aircraft carrier turns with a small circulation radius, as I understand it, during sea trials after repair. In appearance at a distance of two buildings, that is 700 meters, it abruptly changes course.
                        This is the first. Secondly, if this also changes the speed, then getting into a moving ship from 10 km is simply unrealistic. The torpedo is very fast, but noisy and the launch will immediately detect it and begin to take action.
                        As for the kamikaze, even among the Japanese it was loners, not the crews of large ships.
                        And the probability of attacking directly from under the escort ship is close to zero — they will be detected much faster, as you know.
                        It is probably convenient to shoot such a torpedo at a transport or a naval ship without a move, without an escort.
                        But against a warship having a course, possessing much better maneuverability than a transport or civilian one, the probability of hitting it is very low.
                        But the chance of unmasking the boat with the subsequent defeat is, on the contrary, very high.
                        A specific torpedo with its own niche of application, from which some are trying to compose a universal wunderwaffe.
                        hi
                      4. Brylevsky 9 October 2019 06: 32 New
                        • 5
                        • 0
                        +5
                        But no more- sly category.

                        No. This is the limitation: "Less is possible, more is not."
                        Again, civilian ships or ships? Surely there is a difference.

                        I can’t say for sure. On the one hand, there is a container ship with a displacement of about 100 tons, there are 000 steering machines in the tiller compartment (only 3 are constantly in operation, the third is in “stand by”, and the rudder shift time and circulation diameter are close to what I called; with on the other hand, an aircraft carrier, with a close displacement, has maneuverable elements not known to me ... Surely only someone who knows them can tell.
                        We omit the rest as speculation. Assumptions can be confirmed or refuted by calculations, but the question is - to hell? Why bother? Those who need it have calculated everything for a long time; compiled instructions and instructions; released another secret book to the "Rules of the mine service", I don’t remember what series ... Alright! Purely for the sake of "sports interest" you can sit down at the calculations with a calculator in hand and with a maneuverable tablet at the table; and remembering school trigonometry to somehow calculate and understand something for yourself, but this will not change the essence of the matter. But the fact is that to fight (maybe) will have to be given. And on what is ... we want it or not. I have a mine-torpedo gun, I have no illusions about this at all - we are at war on the sea already lost, someone likes it or not ...
                      5. Avior 9 October 2019 06: 45 New
                        • 2
                        • 3
                        -1
                        I wrote that up to 13 is from 0 to 13, and I suspect that the maneuverability of warships is, by definition, better than civilians with the same displacement.
                        They are fighting, of course, with what they have, but this torpedo is not the only one in the fleet, and with the application that they want to attribute to it, it is suicidal for the boat to go to shallow depths - launch from no more than 30 meters - right next to the escort destroyer, and another question is how reliable it is to shoot it according to hydroacoustics, whether it is necessary to float under the periscope under the side of the destroyer.
                        And most importantly, why all this?
                        In the Navy, they are kept by anti-ship missiles and homing torpedoes so that submariners do not have to commit suicide acts and can be attacked from great distances.
                      6. Brylevsky 9 October 2019 07: 33 New
                        • 1
                        • 0
                        +1
                        In the Navy, they are kept by anti-ship missiles and homing torpedoes so that submariners do not have to commit suicide acts and can be attacked from great distances.
                        All true.
                        the question is, how reliable is it to shoot according to hydroacoustics, is it necessary to float under the periscope under the side of the destroyer.

                        The fact is that the boat can carry out a torpedo attack also in the noise-detecting mode, for this it will not need to use the GAS in the radiation mode or to lift the retractable devices - the periscope and the locator. Both that and another in wartime will be tantamount to suicide for her. It will be enough for her to listen to characteristic noises, “catching” on which the BIUS will help to classify the contact and the ISU will perform the necessary calculations in the same way as for a conventional torpedo attack (Addition: in the case of a “Flurry” in calculations there will be no such value as “Switch-on distance homing equipment.) The problem is that these calculations are based on the hypothesis that the target will not change the parameters of its movement, or they will change according to the algorithm known to us. Thus, shooting “blindly” from a safe distance is possible for them, but there is no guarantee that the target will be hit. As in that joke about the Ukrainian and fat: “He will eat something, but only someone will give him ...”. More precisely, your submarine officer from the BS-3 or the submarine commander, who was supposed to have such weapons in the state, will answer your question, but I’m only anti-submarine, and the former one.
                      7. Avior 9 October 2019 07: 44 New
                        • 2
                        • 2
                        0
                        I am not sure that in the noise-finding mode it is possible to determine the bearing on a moving target with such accuracy that it does not fire a homing torpedo.
                        Moreover, in this mode it is difficult to determine the exact range, which means that it will be difficult to use the Flurry from large distances, its range is very limited, and an error of a couple of kilometers is unacceptable.
                        Shooting without the confidence of hitting the target with a Flurry is also debatable, launching a torpedo will give out the position of the boat right there.
                      8. hydrox 10 October 2019 08: 38 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Well, how much can you say that at the time of the launch of the Flurry, the screens of all turned-on GASs are illuminated with white noise without the slightest opportunity to take the bearing to the submarine?
                2. hydrox 10 October 2019 08: 27 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  And we don’t need to fight at sea: it’s quite enough that not a single American AUG or KUG dares to approach our coast at a distance of less than 1 - 1,5 thousand km (combat radius of carrier aircraft). As for small and separately moving NATO vessels, they can only move at night, in their own coastal waters, in a semi-submerged state, observing the radio silence mode and only on oars, using a rag as a masking element .. laughing
                  Well explained, thanks.
              2. Brylevsky 9 October 2019 07: 02 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                Secondly, if this also changes the speed, then getting into a moving ship from 10 km is simply unrealistic.

                On circulation, speed always drops. The choice of the maneuver of dodging the torpedo will depend on what directional angle and distance it is found: depending on the combination of these factors, one or another method will be used. The only thing that disappears is such a method of evasion as casting to the aft heading angles and the most complete course - the “Flurry" in this case will still be faster. An effective option would be to turn away from its course by +/- 45 degrees and give the most complete: "Flurry" of the torpedo is straight-forward and there will be a chance that it will pass by. And the response radius of his non-contact fuse, I don’t remember, is already how much ... 10 meters, in my opinion ... So, you are right: to get a “Flurry” even at such a target as an aircraft carrier is extremely difficult and suicidal for the boat itself.
              3. Demon_is_ada 10 October 2019 04: 55 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                Something people missed another opportunity, talking only about the single launch of a torpedo laughing ... and we will not discuss the firing of several torpedoes? wassat
        2. Brylevsky 9 October 2019 04: 02 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Quote: Avior
          I think evasion from a torpedo attack is practiced there by apprentices, and repeatedly

          Exactly. And with us, and with "them." We have: maneuvering in order to bring torpedoes into the RBU-6000 or RBU-1000 firing sector (Those who have them. Those who don’t have it are not lucky). Volley, bringing torpedoes to stern heading angles, the most complete forward. The increase in speed to maximum, maneuvering with the aim of bringing to the aft heading angles occur simultaneously. Even such a task is in the “Ship Preparation Course”, I don’t remember what “K -...” is already there, and upon leaving / entering from / to the base, all RBUs ​​are ready for anti-torpedo protection.
          I do not know exactly how things are "with them." But near Norfolk and on the approaches to Los Angeles he often saw actively maneuvering ships, from the destroyer to the aircraft carrier, inclusive. It is possible that something like that was practiced there ... Just because combat training, including evading an attacking torpedo (torpedo), is carried out on all self-respecting fleets in the world.
  5. The comment was deleted.
  • Paranoid50 8 October 2019 22: 08 New
    • 5
    • 0
    +5
    Quote: bar
    In the video, not so much an aircraft carrier maneuvers,

    "John, for a long time we will wag like a maritime boat?! "
    RL Stevenson, Treasure Island
  • Ross xnumx 9 October 2019 04: 13 New
    • 1
    • 3
    -2
    Quote: Avior
    With the maneuverability of aircraft carriers, it’s far not as bad as it seems, looking at their size

    A joke about the "pichicatto" recall? So, when he "maneuvers" just like that, it is permissible to note that he is so "cursing". And in the marching order, the order moves like this:

    Remind about the radius of the lesion or miscalculate the wake of the wake?
    1. Avior 9 October 2019 05: 59 New
      • 2
      • 2
      0
      When he hears a torpedo, it will turn off. And he will hear right away. And in peacetime, why wag?
      Again, the course angle is not necessarily 90 degrees, especially if the AUG is zigzag.
      And as for the rainbow of defeat, there is no such warhead there.
  • Olya Tsako 8 October 2019 17: 25 New
    • 9
    • 11
    -2
    The Squall high-speed missile torpedo is a cheap rattle compared to the 65-76 “Soviet thick torpedo”. The glory of "Squall" is undeserved - the torpedo is completely useless as a weapon, and its combat value tends to a round zero.




    Unlike the 65-76, which hits 50 or more kilometers, the firing range of the Squall does not exceed 7 km (the new version is 13 km). Little, very little. In modern naval combat, reaching such a distance is an extremely difficult and risky task. The combat part of the rocket torpedo is lighter almost 3 times. But the main “snag” in this whole story - “Squall”, due to its high speed, is an unguided weapon, and the probability of its hitting even the weakly maneuvering target is close to 0%, especially considering that the “Squall” attack is devoid of any secrecy. It is easy to detect an underwater missile going on a combat course - and no matter how fast the Squall is, the ship will have time to change course and depart a considerable distance from the calculated aiming point while it is overcoming 10 km. It is not difficult to imagine what will happen in this case with the submarine that launched the Squall - the distinct trail of rocket-torpedoes will clearly indicate the location of the submarine.
    1. Olya Tsako 8 October 2019 17: 29 New
      • 4
      • 4
      0
      Torpedo "Kit" -№65-76. was withdrawn at the prompt of the NATO-Penagon advisers, from = due to the Kursk accident.
      The Yankees were afraid of “Kita” like fire, and the “Flurry" ......... to a bad letter.
    2. Maz
      Maz 8 October 2019 17: 33 New
      • 3
      • 4
      -1
      drone with a suspended torpedo, bring half a mile and shoot, and forget. Fuck from her at such a distance you dodge. the second option is to go through and leave it in limbo at the convoy by turning on homing in position and delayed launch. Modern diesel-electric submarines may well pass between the ships of an aircraft carrier convoy leaving them with such a present hanging in the water column as a delayed alarm clock .. with a rocket traction. and pistol shot point blank.
      1. Olya Tsako 8 October 2019 17: 37 New
        • 3
        • 3
        0
        Need a good drone. Weight "Flurry" -2700 kg. Where to find a drone for such a shot mass.
        1. Maz
          Maz 8 October 2019 17: 55 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Poseidon mini submarine, which has still not gone to sea. let him carry it
        2. bar
          bar 8 October 2019 20: 55 New
          • 1
          • 1
          0
          You forgot about the S-70 Hunter. According to various rumors, its combat load is just from 2,8 to 8,0 tons.
          What is not a carrier for a couple with the Su-57
    3. kapitan92 8 October 2019 20: 24 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: Olya Tsako
      It’s easy to detect an underwater missile going on a combat course - and no matter how fast the Flurry is, for that time, while it overcomes 10 km, the ship will have time to change course and retreat at a considerable distance from the estimated aiming point[/ b].

      TECH SPECS
      [b] The performance characteristics of the Flurry torpedo:

      Caliber - 533,4 mm;
      Length - 8 meters;
      Weight - 2700 kg;
      The power of a nuclear warhead is 150 ct of TNT;
      The mass of a conventional warhead is 210 kg;
      Speed ​​- 375 km / h;
      Radius of action - the old torpedo is about 7 kilometers / upgraded to 13 km.
      Differences (features) TTX Shkval-E:

      Length - 8,2 m;
      Range of travel - up to 10 kilometers;
      Depth of the course - 6 meters;
      The warhead is only high explosive;
      Type of launch - surface or underwater;
      The depth of the underwater launch is up to 30 meters.
      https://militaryarms.ru/boepripasy/torpedy/reaktivnaya-torpeda-shkval/
      Make a simple mathematical calculation: The time in which a torpedo will hit a target at a distance of 10 km with a speed of 375 km / h. What is the solid distance from the calculated aiming point ??? laughing
      The main disadvantage of the Flurry is the range and noise, the price goes off scale.
      Currently not used by the Navy.
      PySy. Work is underway on Squall M2, the information is classified. hi
    4. Rostislav 8 October 2019 21: 17 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      And where will he manage to leave in 3 minutes, which the “Flurry” needs to pass these 10 km.? Max. 1,5 miles, i.e. all the same, it will remain in the affected area when using YaBCh.
      1. Avior 8 October 2019 21: 46 New
        • 2
        • 2
        0
        The problem will be simply to shoot such a torpedo from 10 km, it will have to be done directly near the escort destroyer, the boat will be drowned in a minute, they will not miss this in any way.
        But really earlier, near the destroyer the boat will find no options
    5. bar
      bar 8 October 2019 21: 21 New
      • 1
      • 2
      -1
      during the time that he overcomes 10 km, the ship will have time to change course and retreat at a considerable distance from the estimated aiming point.

      I would not be so sure. Well, at what such a great distance can a ship go in 1-2 minutes? This is not a sports car. It takes a decent amount of time for him to change speed and direction, even if the crew timely detects the launch of a torpedo.
      1. Avior 8 October 2019 21: 41 New
        • 1
        • 2
        -1
        It’s enough to walk 300 meters.
        The speed of an aircraft carrier at full speed is about 1 km per minute.
        In reality, you just need to reset the stroke and perform the circulation.
        1. Nastia makarova 9 October 2019 07: 37 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          300 meters will not save from a nuclear explosion))))))
          1. Avior 9 October 2019 08: 27 New
            • 1
            • 3
            -2
            Which has nowhere to come from
            1. Nastia makarova 9 October 2019 12: 34 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              a flurry is made specifically for nuclear weapons
        2. bar
          bar 10 October 2019 08: 54 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          There is much to be done. But the problem is that with its mass, dimensions and inertia, an aircraft carrier can do nothing _fast_. Neither accelerate to full speed, nor reset, nor begin circulation.
      2. hydrox 10 October 2019 08: 51 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        The crew CANNOT detect the launch, the GAS screens of the entire order will be illuminated by cavitation interference ...
  • SERGEY SERGEEVICS 8 October 2019 17: 30 New
    • 4
    • 7
    -3
    "Squall". In the XNUMXst century, the general principle she demonstrated remains relevant for the Navy of the whole world.
    Our weapons specialists are generally handsome, if they do something, they do it for centuries.
  • Mavrikiy 8 October 2019 18: 06 New
    • 6
    • 0
    +6
    NI: Russian flurry torpedo "Flurry" is unique today
    Since we exist today, our weapons are the very best in the world. repeat Definitely.
  • poquello 8 October 2019 18: 38 New
    • 4
    • 4
    0
    More than 6 km per minute, tell us more about its easy detection, despite the fact that only we have the package, and their anti-torpedoes are crooked. A logical continuation could be the second stage of a flurry, such as quiet delivery to a point and guidance, or vice versa a squall flurry and exit of some type of physicist.
    1. hydrox 10 October 2019 09: 04 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      And so it can be done, but why complicate it?
      After all, we absolutely do not imagine the performance characteristics of the Shkval-M (homing) and Shkval-M2 products (about which no one knows anything at all) - but what if they show us one more cartoon to NG?
      I don’t think that our enemies will be hihanek based on experience ...
  • Kontrik 8 October 2019 18: 59 New
    • 4
    • 3
    +1
    One of the most innovative underwater weapons developed by the Soviet Union,

    It has been almost 30 years since the USSR did not exist, and we all use the foundation laid at the beginning of its creation .. The fight against illiteracy, Electoralization of the whole country .. AVIHSIM and more .. Komsomol construction sites, the Stakhanov movement .. And much more, then everything It was built on Romance and the enthusiasm of creativity and, most importantly, CREATIONS !!! ...
    Now they despise such people, as if they didn’t know how to make money and promote PR. Oh youth hehe ..
    We are dying, and what have you done and created for the country?
  • Rzzz 8 October 2019 19: 56 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    Supercavitation is not at all what is happening here. This process applies to propellers. Although I agree, it sounds beautiful, screw the article cool!
    1. AAK
      AAK 8 October 2019 20: 51 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      I agree, colleague, as far as I remember the effect applicable to the Flurry - not supercavitation, but a gas cavity ... Supercavitation, or rather supercavitating screws, was written when assessing the driving performance of our RTOs on deeply submerged hydrofoils (Kunakhovich, Antares, etc. .p.), also similar propulsors - pulling-pushing screw columns, on the “Bor” and “Samum”
      1. Rzzz 8 October 2019 22: 27 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Well yes. As a person who passed the TUS exam, I can tell you about cavitation, but I won’t load it, because offtopic. Whoever needs it will find, at least on Wikipedia.
    2. Avior 8 October 2019 21: 54 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      On global security, an amnalogy American torpedo is called
      High-Speed ​​(Supercavitating) Undersea Weapon
      German Barracuda - superkavitierender Unterwasserlaufkörper
    3. hydrox 10 October 2019 09: 17 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      In the physics of these processes, these processes are very similar: there and there is the formation of cavitation bubbles with their subsequent collapse and the release of significant energy in the microvolume of the collapsing bubble: the sound is fixed, and the destruction of the screw and the violation of the elegant shape of the surface - just by examining the cripple.
      But you are right, the formation of cavitation cavities of large sizes - yes, the result of millisecond processes, in contrast to microsecond processes of high speeds.
  • garri-lin 8 October 2019 20: 42 New
    • 0
    • 2
    -2
    If you consider that Flurry is a purely defensive weapon of submarines from enemy submarines, then it has a range of 6 and even more than 13 km. In fact, the first serial anti-torpedo. Fight off a volley and create a lot of interference for your own disguise and care.
    1. Avior 8 October 2019 21: 41 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      A barrage cannot serve for defense against submarines; it is non-homing and acts only at shallow depths.
      1. garri-lin 8 October 2019 21: 49 New
        • 0
        • 2
        -2
        He doesn’t have to get home. And do not hit. After an attack from the side of the enemy’s boat, you just need to shoot in its direction and begin to maneuver in order to confuse the enemy. The most important purpose of the Flurry is to bring down the guidance of the enemy's remote-controlled torpedoes. And ideally, and destroy them. And the depth. Think about what a boat going at a depth of 30 meters can do very important.
        1. Avior 8 October 2019 22: 10 New
          • 1
          • 2
          -1
          And what's the point of this shot?
          1. garri-lin 8 October 2019 22: 17 New
            • 1
            • 2
            -1
            200 kilotons on the route of enemy torpedoes? I think after such a firework and torpedoes will be neutralized and the aggressor boat for some time will lose contact with the target.
            1. Avior 8 October 2019 23: 03 New
              • 2
              • 2
              0
              What makes you think that we need a nuclear warhead?
              It has long been removed.
              It’s just dangerous for the boat
              1. garri-lin 9 October 2019 00: 00 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                So the fact of the matter is that the flurry came only with special warheads. Everything else is an export option and late insinuations after declassification in the late 90s. It was then that the Flurry ceased to exist PDA combat unit. Unfortunately. With a conventional warhead, it is meaningless. Unfortunately, almost simultaneously, Russia lost two of its best ammunition. Whale for Kursk and Flurry for declassification.
                1. hydrox 10 October 2019 09: 25 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  Do not be discouraged: after all, no one knows what is hidden behind the Shkval-M1 and Shkval-M2 product indexes - who knows, maybe someone will turn someone inside out ... laughing
                  1. garri-lin 10 October 2019 12: 17 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    There is hope. In general, it’s good that Russia was busy with torpedo weapons.
  • Nikolai 8 October 2019 21: 36 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    To AUG at a distance of 13 km is not suitable. Is it possible to work as a Flurry of civil convoys in communications with the weak security of a special warhead? After the explosion, special. The warrant for the guard order will no longer be up to the submarine. And he will fly 13 km in 2 minutes. Security response time is clearly longer. Everything can turn out for a slow-moving target.
    1. Avior 8 October 2019 22: 07 New
      • 1
      • 2
      -1
      Even with poor security, it’s unrealistic to approach the convoy for 10 km.
      And where did you get that nuclear war part?
      1. Nikolai 9 October 2019 18: 37 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        So they wrote ...
  • al3x 8 October 2019 22: 10 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Of course, I am not special and therefore I am interested in the following - what will happen to the Flurry carrier if a special warhead is used at a distance of 7-13 km from it? Will the casing pl withstand such an impulse in a dense medium?
  • Nizhlogger 8 October 2019 23: 02 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    A flurry is a good thing. If not as an independent torpedo, then as a tugboat for a real quiet torpedo with GOS and others. Speed ​​is important.
    1. garri-lin 9 October 2019 00: 05 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      A new flurry may be a good Poseidon War Block. Depth only add twenty times.
      1. Cympak 9 October 2019 07: 56 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        But how to ensure the existence of a cavitation bubble at great depths under great pressure?
  • Bator 9 October 2019 04: 45 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    because of the tests, a flurry before the sale of the Chinese p.in. dosa and sank Kursk ...
    1. Cympak 9 October 2019 07: 54 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: Bator
      because of the tests, a flurry before the sale of the Chinese p.in. dosa and sank Kursk ...

      And how was it supposed to affect?
  • Cympak 9 October 2019 08: 16 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: hydrox
    And it is not a fact that the carrier carrier will be defeated in that hustle: after all, it is unlikely that anyone in this roar will be able to determine the source of the super-sound and even more so identify it with the escaping submarine in the background of the explosion of nuclear warheads - it just will not happen.

    Are you, as an acoustician with experience, say? Or as a person who does not know the theory of acoustic waves at school did not pass?
  • gridasov 10 October 2019 15: 08 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    The principle inherent in the movement of a torpel Flurry can be both adjustable and not controlled. In the second case, if chemical processes are used. The first controlled method was proposed by Schauberger. It is surprising to observe a misunderstanding of what the scientist suggested many years ago. Everything looks even simpler if you replace the screw principle with a new mover.