From extreme to extreme? There is a risk that Peter the Great will not receive new missiles


Project 1144 heavy nuclear missile cruiser (code "Orlan") "Peter the Great" (former "Kuybyshev")


February 20, Flot.com citing informed sources сообщил:

"The long-planned modernization of the Peter the Great the heavy missile cruiser Project 11442 (the Orlan code) will be carried out with emphasis on repairing and updating the ship’s main power plant."

On the one hand, the presentation of the material raises questions, even the project number is confused: “Peter the Great” was built according to project 1144.2, code “Orlan”. On the other hand, in naval Wednesday, there has long been a sentiment that Petra does not need to be modernized following the example of the Admiral Nakhimov of the same type, but simply repaired. The message that “Peter” will “emphasize” the main power plant and repair, apparently, is somehow connected with these moods.

I must say, the modernization of Nakhimov really turned out to be super expensive, and indeed, Peter the Great should not go through the same thing, our country simply does not have that much money. But to refuse to upgrade the ship is a mistake worse than a crime. With these ships, everything is complicated, but they should develop further.

Atomic rocket


The USSR was 16 years late with the nuclear missile cruiser compared to the United States, the Americans laid down their atomic Long Beach back in 1957, and we started building the first missile ship with nuclear reactors and missiles in 1973. But the new cruisers were supposed to be powered "Plug in the belt" everything. In many ways, it turned out that the ships were really very powerful. The head “Kirov” was so scared of the West that the Americans began an expensive program of reactivation and equipping their battleships with missiles, and for the first time after the Second World War, the Air Force began to adapt its strategic bombers to surface targets. The breakthrough of such ships on ocean communications would have to be eliminated by all the US Navy at the theater of operations, and not the fact that it would have happened on time. The ships had an S-300F air defense system (96 anti-aircraft missiles), and the Peter the Great S-300 FM and S-300F together (46 and 48 missiles) have air defense systems of the near air defense zone and artillery air defense systems. In general, even assuming that aviation the enemy managed to destroy such a ship, then the price for such a victory would have to pay a very large.

The artillery installation of the ship, AK-130 with a caliber of 130 mm with two barrels, is by far the most powerful ship artillery system in the world. True, the lead ship in the series, “Kirov,” had a couple of hundred millimetres, but this was corrected, as well, by the way, and much more than the lead ship differed from all serial ones. At the time of taking the ship into the combat structure of the Navy, something was stronger only for American ships of the Second World War, but for such an opponent the Soviet cruiser had missiles.

From extreme to extreme? There is a risk that Peter the Great will not receive new missiles
Kirov and Tu-16. Two artillery mounts visible


Differences of the head "Kirov" from the following in a series of ships

Ships have a powerful sonar complex "Polynomial", a set of anti-submarine weaponscapable of carrying up to three helicopters on board in some cases. Offensive weapons, 20 granite supersonic anti-ship missiles (ASM) - at the time of adoption, perhaps the most powerful ASM in the world. Not a single ship in the world can repulse a volley of such a ship alone, and, in principle, can win a battle against it (under the unmistakable actions of the crew and commander of the domestic cruiser, of course).

It was planned to build five of these ships, but only four were built. “Kirov” (later renamed “Admiral Ushakov”), “Frunze” (“Admiral Lazarev”), “Kalinin” (“Admiral Nakhimov”) and “Kuibyshev”, which the truth was already laid down as “Yuri Andropov” (later “ Peter the Great"). The latter was completed in 1998 and only for this reason still walks briskly on the seas.

The collapse of the USSR almost put an end to these ships. Russia did not have money to maintain them in a combat-ready state, an exception was made only for Peter the Great, who did not require such expenses as the old ships of the same type demanded. “Kirov” in fact went out of order after a reactor installation malfunctioned back in 1990 - there was no money to restore it even then, although the ship was later even put on some kind of modernization, which, however, never started. Today it is completely rotten. There were no problems with the reactor at Frunze-Lazarev, it was simply rotted off the coast in the Pacific Ocean - today it is also completely, despite the ship being docked from time to time, it even landed on the ground due to leaks corps.


Lazarev at its last parking spot. Photo by Oleg Kuleshov

Today, none of these two ships can no longer be restored in their technical condition, they will be disposed of. But “Kalinin-Nakhimov” was lucky. They decided to keep it and even modernize it. In 1999, the ship embarked on modernization and repair at Sevmash. Thus began the epic, which continues to this day and does not end earlier than a few years later. Best case scenario.

Restructuring in a single cruiser


The domestic fleet has one terrific disease, which does not go away at all: constant revisions of technical tasks for the construction or repair of ships, in the worst case, to make changes to the design of each individual ship in a series. This is occasionally caused by corruption, sometimes by many years of underfunding, which leads to the fact that some of the subsystems for the ship have time to withdraw from production while it is still under construction, but, admittedly, this is often just bad management. It is difficult to say in what proportion these factors influenced the terms of repair of Nakhimov and the scope of modernization, but the contract for its implementation was signed only in 2013 - 14 years after the ship was transferred to the plant. Then there was a transition to the Sevmash filling pool, disassembly, troubleshooting, and actually the beginning of work, at the very end of 2014.


"Nakhimov" in the drained pool at the perestroika

Most of the information about what will be done with the cruiser came out from under the veil of secrecy very slowly and in proportion, but at some point it became clear: the ship would actually be rebuilt. In fact, the point is that in a very seriously rebuilt building with a completely refurbished main power plant, new weapons, new electronic weapons will be installed, cable routes will be replaced. The striking power of the ship should grow by orders of magnitude, and the total number of both anti-aircraft and cruise (anti-ship and for land strikes) missiles will be hundreds of units.


The installation sites of the UKKSK 3S14 launcher and the huge amount of work performed on the cruiser are visible


Another view for scaling


Sheets of decking with holes for new launchers are visible on the crane cable and on the ground

It was assumed that the ship will be able, if necessary, to bring down the Caliber salvo on the coastal target and it will still have anti-ship variants of the Caliber, or even Onyx with Zircons. His air defense system was strengthened just as much. The power of the ship was to be unprecedented. Perhaps it will be so when it is finally surrendered to the fleet. However, this coin has another side.

The name for this side is price. The Navy does not disclose the exact costs of the modernization of Nakhimov, but it is clear that they have either come close, or will soon come to a hundred billion rubles. Recall that the cost of a new aircraft carrier for the Russian Navy is estimated at 400 billion rubles. A hundred billion is a lot, this is a corvette team for the Pacific Fleet, which has almost lost its anti-submarine forces, or a complete update of all anti-submarine aviation, which flies mainly on aircraft built back in the USSR.

And although the “Nakhimov” promises to turn out to be a really very strong ship, the money that was invested in its repair would be enough to strengthen the entire fleet as a whole, which one ship, with all due respect to it, would not provide. Just because he is alone.

The terms of the most complex restructuring of the ship (it’s no longer repair and modernization, it’s completely rebuild it) is also the same as we say “float to the right”, and today we can only speak with greater or lesser degree of confidence about surrendering to the fleet in the first half of the 20s years.

The cost of money and time, which Nakhimov demanded, seriously scared everyone involved in this project, and I must say, it cost a career a certain number of people, including those not involved. It just so happened, the cruiser for the highest echelons of power launched a very big wave.

The fact that they won’t repeat anything like this with Peter was obvious for a long time, but now there are signs that the Navy may throw out a child with water. And instead of revising the volumes of modernization downward, to abandon it altogether, limiting itself to ship repair and minimal improvements to the systems already installed on it.

Repair of Peter the Great


The main problem with domestic ships is cable routes. They are traditionally laid in such a way that their complete replacement at a cost sometimes turns out to be only several times cheaper than building a new ship. At the same time, it is impossible not to change them: over the years, the insulation of the wiring is destroyed by old age. Nuclear cruisers are no exception. Also, a lot of money will cost the repair of a nuclear power plant. All this suggests that the repair of the Peter the Great cruiser itself will cost a lot of money, even without modernization. And this may be an additional trump card for those who would not like to see this modernization.

Nevertheless, even if it is necessary to bear these costs, it is worth updating missile weapons on the ship.

We are in no way talking about the level of changes in the design that takes place at Nakhimov. It is a matter of replacing launchers of the Granit rocket launcher with the same 3C14 universal launchers that Nakhimov is equipped with (a special version made for this cruiser) and limit itself to minimal changes to all other systems.

Replacing the “Granites” is a vital necessity. These missiles are far from being as formidable as they were when they first appeared. Their number on the ship is frankly small. Even on frigates of project 22350 Admiral Amelko and Admiral Chichagov, it will be possible to equip launchers with a large number of anti-ship missiles or cruise missiles of long range - 24 units. And among them there may be supersonic Onyxes and future hypersonic Zircons, that is, missiles more dangerous for the enemy than Granite. But these are small ships, four times lighter in displacement than Peter the Great.


Start "Granite" with "Peter the Great". Impressive, but it’s not such an effective weapon as before.

In addition, “Peter the Great” is practically deprived of the ability to launch rocket attacks along the coast, and this is almost more important task now than attacks of surface ships. In order for the existence of Peter the Great in the Navy and the expenses incurred by the fleet to maintain it to continue to make sense, the replacement of its offensive weapons is necessary. This ship will fit many dozens of missiles and from a highly specialized strike ship, which best hits other surface ships, it will turn into a not-so-modern ship, but still a very significant combat unit, incomparably more important than with the current twenty "Granites".

The minimum modernization of shipboard air defense systems, the minimum modernization of electronic weapons, systems for the mutual exchange of information with other ships, and, most importantly, with ship's helicopters, ensure that the air defense capabilities of these ships remain relevant for another fifteen years after Peter the Great returns in order. And his missile offensive weapons are inadequate right now, and he needs to be changed to modern.

A bad experience with Nakhimov should not push the fleet to the other extreme and should not help the ship to remain with a museum offensive weapon after an expensive (remember cable route) repair. This will deprive the ship of the meaning of existence, taking into account how much money it costs for the country.

The power of the cruisers


Imagine that the “Nakhimov” was completed as planned, and the “Peter the Great” - according to some simplified scheme, with the complete replacement of only percussion weapons.

A pair of such ships, with some advanced combat helicopters capable of performing DRLO tasks and providing target designation for naval air defense systems outside the radio horizon, will require dozens of aircraft to destroy them, and outside the combat radius of the base aviation a full-fledged carrier strike group. Moreover, even in such a situation, the result is not guaranteed.

On cruisers you can place a large number of crewless boats with inflatable false targets, to divert the enemy to false targets and organize "missile ambushes." If there is a smooth interaction with the base reconnaissance aircraft, they will be able to get enough information about the enemy, so that when you need to dodge the battle, and choose a fairly weak victim. In the case of a hypothetical war against Russia, a breakthrough of a pair of such ships into the open ocean will force any enemy to remove dozens of ships and patrol aircraft from the tasks of attacking the Russian Federation. And this means that all these forces will be distracted from their main tasks.

In addition, the 30-nodal move that these ships can support for a long time, firstly, will allow them to dodge the battle when necessary, just tearing away from the enemy with a move, and secondly, will make them intact for enemy submarines.

Article “We are building a fleet. Attacks of the weak, loss of the strong raid actions were described that would allow small Russian forces to keep the enemy’s forces as large as possible, simply due to their superior speed and ability to attack objects and ships that are important for the enemy that are poorly guarded or away from the main theater of operations - and the enemy with a high degree of probability is simply nothing to answer.

Such action is one of the very few ways to use a missile ship against superior enemy forces, not having its own aircraft carrier, but with success.

And if there are working systems for the mutual exchange of information between cruisers, full-fledged sea helicopters and proper preparation, these operations will be quite capable of modernized cruisers. Moreover, the cruisers seemed to be created specifically for them - fast, nuclear, well-armed ships, including against the air enemy.

But all this will be true only if, after the epic with Nakhimov, Peter the Great will also receive a new complex of offensive missile weapons instead of Granites.

We can only hope that common sense will prevail, and correct, balanced decisions will be made with respect to Peter the Great. Do not be shy to demand this from the authorities.
Author:
Photos used:
warspot.ru, razgromflota.ru, ot-a-do-ya.org/А. N. Sokolov, Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, rg.ru, sdelanounas.ru, TV- "Star"
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

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

I have an account? Sign in

  1. mvg
    mvg 4 March 2020 05: 10 New
    • 22
    • 62
    -40
    And yet, why the article can not be put a minus? Alexander, the yentot the most powerful ship, is corny inferior to one of the 70 destroyers Orly Burke and the like, for example, the Korean "kings". What is this article for? Feed the "patriots" a dash of itiots ??? To do this, there is YouTube and a bunch of expert
    1. passerby 4 March 2020 05: 49 New
      • 15
      • 5
      +10
      Quote: mvg
      And yet, why the article can not be put a minus? Alexander, the yentot the most powerful ship, is corny inferior to one of the 70 destroyers Orly Burke and the like, for example, the Korean "kings". What is this article for? Feed the "patriots" a dash of itiots ??? To do this, there is YouTube and a bunch of expert


      Why do you think that the modernized Nakhimov will concede to the Berks?
      1. bessmertniy 4 March 2020 07: 56 New
        • 3
        • 3
        0
        We assume that the right decision has been made. And from our opinions it is unlikely to change.
      2. mvg
        mvg 9 March 2020 13: 55 New
        • 1
        • 3
        -2
        that the modernized Nakhimov will concede to the Berks

        I spoke for the modernization of Peter. Everything needs to be changed there. Radar, air defense, main caliber, patch the hull, do routine nuclear power. The ship is 35 years old. Outrageous cost. Yes, and nuclear, dear.
        Let's see what they’ll do with Nakhimov. As practice 1164, 1155, 1143,5 show, they refuse this.
        Burke IIA, the new Aegis, 96 cells, SM-6, Tomogavki IV, LRASM, covered from the air by an air group of 90 sides, go 5-6 sides, and 2-3 MAPL. Plus they are able to constantly keep AWACS. Shoot down satellites.
        PS: When Zircon flies, when 1144 Nakhimov was modernized, it took 22350 years to 10, to Poliment, to GEM. After Nakhimov, Peter will rise. Another 4-5 years. I do not believe!
    2. Bar1 4 March 2020 08: 59 New
      • 9
      • 31
      -22
      whatever you call a yacht, it will sail. Problems with the ship of Peter V. Well, what do you want. Who was Tsar Peter? This is what Leo Tolstoy said about him.

      Leo Tolstoy about Peter the Great
      The unbelievable beast Peter makes some people kill and torment other people for hundreds, thousands, he amuses himself with executions, cuts his head with a drunk, unskillful hand, not immediately grabbing his neck, buries his lover in the ground, sets the whole city with hangouts to eat corpses, and swims to fight patriarch and protodeacon with a box of bottles in the form of the Gospel, with crosses in the tubes in the form of the children’s members, forcing some people to kill at workѣ and warsѣ millions of people, forcing some people to execute, burn, eversion Vat joints at (vsѣh vѣruyuschih unto God) drugih people stigmatize kak herds of cattle, and vozvodit ubivaet son on his prestol nalozhnika and his. And monuments are erected to him and they are called the benefactor of Russia and the great man, and all of him gave him; not only is it justified that everything that people did according to his will, is considered legal, necessary and do not fall on the conscience of the people who did it. And they say about his cruelty: why remember, it has passed.

      Why remember the old? we say. But if they hadn’t been remembered, they would not have been remembered. But this is only said so that, not remembering the horrors of stugo, to continue the horrors of the present in other forms ...
      How to remember? If I had a feverish or dangerous illness and I was cured or got rid of it, I will always remember with joy. I will not remember only when I am sick and all the same, worse, and I want to deceive myself. But we are sick and all are also sick. The disease that we are sick with is the killing of people ...

      © Leo Tolstoy, PSS, M., 1936, v. 26, p. 567
      Download volume 26 and see this entry here.


      The horrors of Russian history begin with Peter I the most startling and especially close and understandable to us.
      Unbelievable, drunk, rotten from syphilis, a beast 1/4 of a century kills people, executes, burns, buries alive in the ground, imprisoned his wife, is licentious, sodomizes, drunk, has fun when he cuts his head, he is at home and similarities of the Gospel - a box with vodka to glorify Christ, i.e., to swear at his faith, to crown his lover and his lover, to tear Russia and execute his son and die from syphilis, and not only do not remember his evil deeds, but still do not cease to praise the laziness of the valor of this monster, and not the end of any kind of monument to him.

      In the same place. S. 568.


      https://ltraditionalist.livejournal.com/832133.html
      1. AK1972 4 March 2020 10: 37 New
        • 12
        • 1
        +11
        Again, alternative people flood, but moderators do not see.
      2. Farewell 4 March 2020 12: 37 New
        • 20
        • 1
        +19
        Since when did Lev Nikolayevich become the ultimate truth in the interpretation of historical events and the evaluation of historical personalities?
      3. EvilLion 4 March 2020 15: 34 New
        • 6
        • 2
        +4
        Well, Lev Tolstoy himself did not fight in hysterics and did not write stupidity, of course.
    3. timokhin-aa 4 March 2020 10: 46 New
      • 23
      • 0
      +23
      You can not compare Burke and 1144, these are ships with different purposes. That the Burke air defense circuit is better is clear.
      The fact that along the coast it can work well, we saw.

      But, for example, if possible, attack surface ships, it is worse than even unmoderned 1144.
      And after the modernization, Nakhimov will surpass Burk in the number of CDs.

      Plus the ability to nightmare enemy communications while having high speed and unlimited range - this Burke cannot separately from all other US Navy.

      These are conceptually different ships, no need to compare them.
      1. Alex_59 4 March 2020 11: 37 New
        • 5
        • 3
        +2
        Quote: timokhin-aa
        And after the modernization, Nakhimov will surpass Burk in the number of CDs.

        It would be better if our Nakhimovs surpassed Berkov in quantity. That would be the case. And so ...
        1. timokhin-aa 4 March 2020 12: 21 New
          • 9
          • 1
          +8
          In principle, we don’t need so many ships.
      2. Whalebone 5 March 2020 10: 12 New
        • 4
        • 3
        +1
        Let's see what kind of communication Peter can “nightmare” right now? What is its main functionality with the cost of repairs comparable to the cost of building and assembling Boreya? Or a couple of regiments of the Su-34, or three hundred of the latest anti-ship missiles? The indistinct doctrine of the development of the Navy has led to the fact that the astronomical figures of budget appropriations are being poorly mastered with a minimal increase in combat effectiveness. Orlanes were created for a great war in the open ocean, sertelic, to the bitter end. Now we have no one to fight there.
        1. timokhin-aa 5 March 2020 14: 11 New
          • 2
          • 1
          +1
          Let's see what kind of communication Peter can “nightmare” right now?


          Any outside the combat radius of the base aircraft.
          1. bayard 5 March 2020 21: 22 New
            • 6
            • 1
            +5
            Alexander, I’m afraid that when we discuss this topic, we proceed from not quite reliable information about the cost of modernizing Admiral Nakhimov. The author called the amount "approximately 100 billion rubles." but Klimov, possessing more reliable information, named the amount of 200 billion rubles. "and God forbid that this amount is not exceeded." And it seems to me that Klimov is closer to the truth.
            That is why the question arose of refusing to modernize Peter the Great, and to get along with ordinary repairs. Not even completely capital. After all, if the figure is "about 200 billion rubles." true, the proposed under-modernization of "Peter V." will result in a figure close to thereby 100 billion rubles. that is simply unacceptable.
            Moreover, the shipbuilding program in the Russian Federation seems to be moving off the ground and will soon promise to launch the 22350M series, the price of which should reach 40 billion rubles. Two of these frigate destroyers will surpass one modernized Admiral Nakhimov in terms of strike power and will be able to serve confidently for 40 years, and not 15 years after such an extremely prohibitive price upgrade.
            Therefore, most likely, "Peter V." they will simply repair, renovate and let them serve for another 15 years in their original form.
            Purely aesthetically, I would certainly like to have two such ships in all the splendor of their indestructible power, but ... you need to be pragmatists and build a fleet the way you need it, and not the way you want it. For the same 200 billion rubles. you can build FIVE "Super-Potty" and have 240 CDs on them instead of 80.
            It is for this reason that neither Moscow nor Varyag will go into modernization - they will extend the life of the repair and they will serve another 10, or even 15 years. And by then, the change will grow.
            I hope so. hi
    4. venik 4 March 2020 12: 27 New
      • 10
      • 1
      +9
      Quote: mvg
      yentot is the most powerful ship, trite inferior to one of the 70 destroyers Orly Burke and the like, for example, the Korean "kings"

      =======
      Sorry, but WHAT specifically is "corny inferior" ??? More specifically, can ?? Or is it just "verbal diarrhea" like bla-bla-bla ..... Look at everything Я smart and ironic !!!
    5. Alexey RA 4 March 2020 12: 51 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      Quote: mvg
      Alexander, the yentot the most powerful ship, is corny inferior to one of the 70 destroyers Orly Burke and the like, for example, the Korean "kings".

      This is if we take all the UVP from Burke, and only granite from Peter. smile
      But if you remember about the S-300F and "daggers" - then already not so simple.

      The problem of Peter is in the non-universality of UVP: there is no single UVP for the Kyrgyz Republic, anti-ship missiles, missile systems, and PLUR. But at the adversary, as soon as they finish LRASM, Mk.41 will be able to become one.
      1. timokhin-aa 5 March 2020 14: 12 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        This is a double-edged sword - the scheme with one UVP for percussion weapons and its UVP for missiles has advantages, for example, it needs less volume, and this is what allows CRAWLING into the ship.
        On the other hand, yes, there is a minus.
    6. Cyrus 5 March 2020 19: 04 New
      • 0
      • 1
      -1
      So you are such expertof
    7. zvonix 7 March 2020 20: 17 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      It’s very funny to hear that Orlan is inferior to Orly Burke !!
  2. tlauicol 4 March 2020 05: 33 New
    • 13
    • 8
    +5
    From a golden elephant, you can only make a golden elephant with diamonds. And put on the shelf
    1. zxc15682 4 March 2020 08: 50 New
      • 7
      • 32
      -25
      These elephants have long been put on needles. The most useless ships. That and Kuzya.
      1. Bashkirkhan 4 March 2020 10: 17 New
        • 4
        • 2
        +2
        Quote: zxc15682
        These elephants have long been put on needles.

        The author writes:
        There were no problems with the reactor at Frunze-Lazarev, it was simply rotted off the coast in the Pacific Ocean - today it is also completely, despite the ship being docked from time to time, it even landed on the ground due to leaks corps.

        Judging by the article, a heavy nuclear missile cruiser with nuclear warheads periodically lays on the ground. These are comrades AHTUNG! In the Far East, in Fokino, there is a Japanese floating dock PD-41 in which the Ural missile defense system with a nuclear displacement system of 30 kilotons was recently disposed of. It is necessary to dispose of “Admiral Lazarev” in PD-41 while the floating dock is in working condition. PD-41 was built in 1978 and most likely, sooner or later, our managers will drown it as floating docks PD-50 and PD-16. If Russia drowns the PD-41 and a heavy nuclear missile cruiser with nuclear weapons, our Japanese neighbors will not understand us. Japan has already handed over to the Far Eastern Center for Radioactive Waste Management - DalRAO ICC a floating dock Sakura with a displacement of 3,5 tons, a sea tugboat Sumire and two port cranes with a lifting capacity of 30 and 10 tons for the disposal of the Soviet radioactive heritage.
      2. timokhin-aa 4 March 2020 11: 31 New
        • 4
        • 0
        +4
        What are then useful?
        1. Bashkirkhan 4 March 2020 18: 58 New
          • 2
          • 1
          +1
          22160 useful ship. Art and gym. The head of the Ak Bars shipbuilding corporation, Renat Mistakhov, was brought to court in a bribe case today. I don’t know how he will build helicopter carriers on the bunks.
          More details on BUSINESS Online: https://www.business-gazeta.ru/news/460072
          1. timokhin-aa 5 March 2020 14: 03 New
            • 2
            • 0
            +2
            Wow, the news. But this cannot be related to 22160.
        2. Ryaruav 4 March 2020 20: 12 New
          • 0
          • 2
          -2
          especially modernized pikes and ash trees are useful, except patrol boats and so-called communication boats
      3. Cyrus 5 March 2020 19: 04 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        And I think that it’s time for you to let something more useful.
    2. timokhin-aa 4 March 2020 10: 47 New
      • 8
      • 0
      +8
      Well, show me another domestic ship with the same capabilities.
      1. tlauicol 4 March 2020 11: 08 New
        • 2
        • 7
        -5
        Quote: timokhin-aa
        Well, show me another domestic ship with the same capabilities.

        The second golden elephant?
        1. timokhin-aa 4 March 2020 11: 10 New
          • 11
          • 0
          +11
          This is not a serious conversation. A ship, so to speak, was built in vain. But now they are already there, it is wrong to throw them out, if only because how many missiles can be placed on them and by what kind of air defense systems, at least by their ammunition, can stand there.
          1. tlauicol 4 March 2020 11: 25 New
            • 6
            • 3
            +3
            you yourself said that with this money you can upgrade naval aviation or build a corvette squadron. And so he will still rot at the pier - who will let him go into the sea without KUG? Is it to Novaya Zemlya with a couple of BDK and back
            1. timokhin-aa 4 March 2020 11: 26 New
              • 10
              • 0
              +10
              I wrote about money for Nakhimov. But they have already been spent.

              Peter needs to be cut cheaper - repair + replacement of Granites by UKKS and that's it.
              1. tlauicol 4 March 2020 11: 33 New
                • 4
                • 5
                -1
                all right: the money has already been spent. KUG will not be.
                When the cancer is on the mountain ... when Nakhimov goes out of repair, already Gorshkov will go for repair and the last naval tankers will fall apart. Money spent
                1. timokhin-aa 4 March 2020 12: 20 New
                  • 6
                  • 1
                  +5
                  Well, so no need to dramatize. 2022-2023 Nakhimov will be released.
                  1. ser56 4 March 2020 15: 52 New
                    • 3
                    • 3
                    0
                    Quote: timokhin-aa
                    2022-2023 Nakhimov will be released.

                    10 years of repair, 20 in the crap - a ship under 40 years old ... request
                    1. timokhin-aa 5 March 2020 14: 04 New
                      • 4
                      • 0
                      +4
                      So there they even changed the metal of the case in places. He will be almost like new.
                      1. ser56 5 March 2020 14: 05 New
                        • 2
                        • 2
                        0
                        Quote: timokhin-aa
                        He will be almost like new.

                        but ONE! those. unique spare parts, golden content ...
                      2. timokhin-aa 6 March 2020 09: 36 New
                        • 1
                        • 0
                        +1
                        Not without this, but so far we have not so many ships to be scattered around.
                      3. ser56 6 March 2020 13: 30 New
                        • 0
                        • 2
                        -2
                        Quote: timokhin-aa
                        while we do not have many ships to scatter them.

                        with such a policy of using funds, there will not be many new ships ... request
                  2. Dante Alighieri 5 March 2020 22: 56 New
                    • 1
                    • 0
                    +1
                    So there they even changed the metal of the case in places. He will be almost like new.

                    About the metal. Alexander, why mislead readers with the allegedly deplorable state of Admiral Lazarev, citing old photos taken before his docking in 2015 as evidence? By the way, the author of the photo is someone Gleb Insky, and not Oleg Kuleshov, this can be seen in the lower right corner. Oleg published this photo in his LJ in 2013, and even then he himself noted that the photo is quite old (as can be seen from the grain size of the image). Link: https://kuleshovoleg.livejournal.com/243476.html
                    After undergoing repairs in 2015, which, according to the data on the blog https://bmpd.livejournal.com/779184.html, cost 45 million rubles, the ship looks like plus or minus like this:


                    Photo dated April 2015 (https://navy-korabel.livejournal.com/94250.html). Unfortunately, the Internet does not have more “fresh” images of the ship.
                  3. timokhin-aa 6 March 2020 09: 32 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    It’s just a case painted outside. The question is what's inside, but inside there ...

                    If you believe the Navy of course, including insiders. The hull itself, the "trough", we will restore there, internal decks, bulkheads, superstructure, cable tracks, etc. - not.
                  4. Dante Alighieri 6 March 2020 19: 36 New
                    • 1
                    • 0
                    +1
                    I don’t think that when docking this giant they were limited only to cosmetics, I suppose that any work on the hull diffusion was nevertheless done. As for the cable routes, there is no need to restore them in their original form in principle. It is necessary to stretch everything anew. In particular, if it was planned to establish a new composition of weapons similar to that implemented at Nakhimov. Yes, even if the weapons do not change, as the experience of Marshal Ustinov shows, all the cables will have to be pulled evenly new - after all, the wiring and noise immunity of the networks of the 80s. The 20th century is still orders of magnitude inferior to similar products of the 21st century. Yes, and modern jamming systems, as well as radar equipment, present completely different requirements for the quality and ripple of the current, not to mention the very principles of controlling them, and they will have to be installed in any case.

                    Regarding whether this is possible for us or not, we will proceed from the fact that this task is somehow being fulfilled at Nakhimov, and the experience of the already mentioned Marshal Ustinov suggests that this is possible, although this process is not quick.

                    In general, I consider it a sacrilege to cut this grand ship into metal, for we will be objective, the next 30-40 years without a radical change in the state system, we cannot afford to build something like this. The best option would be to find the most dull and inaccessible corner of the dry dock pool on the Star (and if there is none, create it) and stick Lazarev there for a long-term parking. And if he stood there until the money for modernization was found. The main thing is to stay away from the aggressive marine environment capable of finally turning this last echo of the great-power era into just a heap of decayed iron. So far, unlike his sistership Kirov, he is not like that.
                  5. timokhin-aa 10 March 2020 12: 26 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    You are actually offering the option "Nakhimov ++" now, which will have a price of "++".
                    That is, scrape everything from there, remodel decks, remount bulkheads, etc.

                    It will be unjustifiably expensive. Everything should be in moderation.
    3. ser56 4 March 2020 15: 51 New
      • 6
      • 2
      +4
      Quote: timokhin-aa
      repair + replacement of Granites on UKKS and all.

      what for? maybe it’s better to build a couple of potted ones so that at least a little seriality appears in the fleet?
      1. timokhin-aa 5 March 2020 14: 05 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        The construction speed of 22350 is limited not by money, but by subcontractors. Here even with Peter, even without him.
        1. ser56 5 March 2020 15: 37 New
          • 4
          • 1
          +3
          Quote: timokhin-aa
          but as subcontractors. T

          then it is necessary to motivate subcontractors to expand production! And for this the main thing is a good order! If you start the series with another 18 keels 22350 with a prospect of 22350M each, the industry will plow
    4. Cyrus 5 March 2020 19: 05 New
      • 0
      • 2
      -2
      Yeah and his air defense can not stand the blow even AUG, not to mention the AUS
  • ser56 4 March 2020 15: 50 New
    • 5
    • 3
    +2
    Quote: timokhin-aa
    it’s wrong to throw them away, if only because how many missiles can be placed on them and by what kind of air defense systems they can have at least in their ammunition.

    and how much is their content? The United States was so quick to withdraw ships from the crew for this reason - and we are clinging to monsters! We have developed a resource - needles - we need to build new ones ...
    1. timokhin-aa 5 March 2020 14: 05 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      TAM before the development of the resource - decades.
      1. ser56 6 March 2020 13: 25 New
        • 0
        • 1
        -1
        see how money is saved in the USA ... https://topwar.ru/168698-radi-jekonomii-spisyvajutsja-novye-amerikanskie-boevye-korabli.html
        1. timokhin-aa 6 March 2020 16: 21 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          This is not saving, this is an American sawmill, to write off not the old aircraft carrier and then say that a new aircraft carrier is urgently needed. Sawing off decommissioned normal ships - US Navy know-how
          1. ser56 7 March 2020 15: 38 New
            • 1
            • 1
            0
            Quote: timokhin-aa
            Sawing off normal ships - US Navy know-how

            alas, we have to repair ...
    2. Cyrus 5 March 2020 19: 07 New
      • 2
      • 1
      +1
      How much is your content worth? How much is 30 silver coins today?
      1. ser56 6 March 2020 13: 26 New
        • 0
        • 2
        -2
        Quote: Cyrus
        How much is your content worth? How much is 30 silver coins today?

        fools in Russia have always had enough, like informers ... request
  • Alien From 4 March 2020 05: 42 New
    • 8
    • 2
    +6
    Unfortunately, the Union’s backlog was not rubber.
  • Voltsky 4 March 2020 06: 05 New
    • 19
    • 11
    +8
    this is a computer

    and this is a computer

    It’s like I don’t want to poke anyone’s nose with anything, because for what it used to require 24000 tons, now you can fit in 6000-12000 tons. But you give a pancake.

    By the way, lovers of the larger and older, I want to ask a question: why aren't you campaigning for the return of 406mm guns on ships instead of rockets? :)
    1. Simargl 4 March 2020 08: 40 New
      • 6
      • 0
      +6
      Quote: Voletsky
      By the way, lovers of the larger and older, I want to ask a question: why aren't you campaigning for the return of 406mm guns on ships instead of rockets? :)
      The branch is just different ...
      topwar.ru/168221-pochemu-na-samom-dele-ischezli-linkory.html#comment-id-10171564
    2. BREAKTHROUGH READY 4 March 2020 09: 24 New
      • 7
      • 1
      +6
      why don’t you campaigning for the return of 406mm guns on ships instead of rockets? :)
      you probably don’t visit marine-related articles too often. Fantasies about absurd superlinkors are one of the most popular on this site.
    3. Kalmar 4 March 2020 09: 41 New
      • 12
      • 1
      +11
      Quote: Voletsky
      for which 24000t was previously required, now you can fit in 6000-12000t

      I am not campaigning for anything, I just note: these 24000 tons are already there and even afloat, and the "6000-12000" still needs to be designed and built. And here it is already necessary to sit down and very carefully consider what will be faster, more profitable, etc. And so it is clear that a new and modern ship is almost always better than the old one.
      1. Voltsky 4 March 2020 09: 56 New
        • 2
        • 1
        +1
        I remember the articles, I don’t remember exactly where ... and there were given options for updating to the modern state of ships like Kirov; even the most modest of them was very complex, given the fact that the ship is not "young" - it is extremely expensive and dubious pleasure.
        But I’m not saying that it’s not necessary to carry out modernization, I’m talking about the fact that you don’t have to tear off the hair on your head due to the fact that modernization will be carried out rather than processing the platform like on Nakhimov.
        ps I’m only against the Leader project, because it’s Yamato 2.0 is very expensive, and therefore it’s pointless since such boats are expensive to build.
        1. Kalmar 4 March 2020 10: 01 New
          • 6
          • 1
          +5
          Quote: Voletsky
          I'm talking about the fact that you do not have to tear off the hair on your head about the fact that the modernization will be carried out and not the processing of the platform as on Nakhimov.

          If I understand the author of the article correctly, my hair is torn due to the fact that modernization will not happen at all; business will be limited to repair. And it will be just sad: money for the maintenance of "Peter" will still need a lot, and its combat potential every year will be lower and lower. It is even possible, in this situation, it would really be better "on the needles" and invest in the same 22350 (M).
          1. Voltsky 4 March 2020 10: 07 New
            • 2
            • 1
            +1
            Infa is incomprehensible, all data is vague ... and you can interpret them as you like, because nothing is specified + sources are not known.
            But yes, the restructuring of the project, given how many Nakhimov is being done, has put in a sensible approach.
    4. timokhin-aa 4 March 2020 10: 48 New
      • 8
      • 1
      +7
      The question is that a new 12000 tons still need to be built. And then there are already ships, and one already has money in it, and the other is still quite crisp. Now they must be used for their intended purpose.
      1. ser56 4 March 2020 15: 54 New
        • 3
        • 5
        -2
        Quote: timokhin-aa
        Now they must be used for their intended purpose.

        suitcases without a handle ...
      2. Voltsky 4 March 2020 17: 35 New
        • 0
        • 1
        -1
        By appointment, is it an extension of the service life due to repairs, and can it be an easy upgrade? Or redevelopment of the deck, and superstructures of the old hull?
        1. timokhin-aa 5 March 2020 14: 00 New
          • 4
          • 0
          +4
          Reconstruction of that part of the building where Granit launchers are located, detailed to a minimum + repair. If possible, do not touch the add-in.
          1. Voltsky 5 March 2020 18: 58 New
            • 0
            • 1
            -1
            that's yes, it’s logical
      3. Whalebone 5 March 2020 10: 21 New
        • 1
        • 3
        -2
        Do not need a new one in 12 thousand tons. We need 8 pieces of 6-7 thousand tons. A reduced analogue of Burke. 4 per SF and Pacific Fleet. Demonstrate the flag and "so that there are ships in the far sea zone." Coastal patrols are also needed to control borders and economic interests. Reliable, with optimal operating costs. And all the rest of the money put on MPA and base aircraft PLO. The Russian Federation has no one to conduct squadron battles outside of the range of the base aviation. And there is nothing to dream about it. Admirals need stars and expensive toys, and the country needs the fleet that performs the necessary tasks. Ocean dominance does not apply to them.
      4. Firelake 5 March 2020 13: 31 New
        • 0
        • 2
        -2
        Yes, such monsters are no longer needed. That is the point. And the leader there too. He doesn’t need him. It is better to build a lot of the same type. Than 3 golden elephants and with different tusks
        1. timokhin-aa 5 March 2020 14: 00 New
          • 2
          • 1
          +1
          They already are, it is necessary to use them.
    5. Per se. 4 March 2020 10: 57 New
      • 15
      • 1
      +14
      "This is a computer," this is Vladimir (Voletsky), also a computer, one of the newest supercomputers in the United States.

      And so you can distort, play with words and meaning. By the way, and wooden accounting accounts in fact "computer", and it all depends on the functionality of the consumed tasks. On this, you can dissemble, pull the "fingertip on the globe", without delving into the fact that a laptop and a supercomputer are two big differences, like MRCs against an atomic cruiser. The fact that electronics has become more compact than the first computers were, does not explain in any way the uselessness of large warships.
      1. alexmach 4 March 2020 12: 48 New
        • 1
        • 3
        -2
        By the way, and wooden accounting accounts in fact "computer"

        No, not at all. A computer is by definition electronic.
        1. ser56 4 March 2020 15: 54 New
          • 5
          • 2
          +3
          Quote: alexmach
          A computer is by definition electronic.

          the first were electromechanical ...
          1. alexmach 4 March 2020 15: 58 New
            • 3
            • 3
            0
            the first were electromechanical ...

            Were not.
            In the black and white photo above ENIAC (Electronic Numerical Integrator and computer) - the machine from which the word computer came from. And she was a tube and not a mechanical one.
            Computer architecture began to be developed in 1943 by John Presper Eckert and John William Mokley, scientists from the University of Pennsylvania (Moore's Electrotechnical School), commissioned by the Ballistic Research Laboratory of the United States Army to calculate shooting tables. Unlike the Z1941 complex created in 3 by the German engineer Konrad Zuse, which used mechanical relays, electronic lamps were used at ENIAK as the basis of the element base.
            1. ser56 4 March 2020 16: 16 New
              • 4
              • 1
              +3
              Quote: alexmach
              Were not.

              not at all ... do not confuse a computer with a computer request
              "Z3 is the first fully functional full-featured program-controlled and freely programmable computer [1], which has the ability to perform binary binary floating-point calculations and all the properties of a modern computer."
              Quote: alexmach
              mechanical relays

              "The machine was a binary computer with limited programmability, made on the basis of telephone relays. A data storage device was also implemented on the same relays. Their total number was about 2600 relays."
              I remind you - relays - electromechanical ... repeat
              I hope you heard ... hi
              1. ser56 4 March 2020 16: 18 New
                • 4
                • 1
                +3
                addition:
                “The American ENIAC computer was created 4 years later than Z3. The Eniak circuit was based on vacuum electronic tubes, while the Z3 used electromechanical relays. Nevertheless, the Eniak was a decimal machine, and the Z3 was already binary. [12] Before reprogramming the ENIAK, it was actually necessary to reconnect again, while the Z1948 was able to read programs from perforated tape. Modern computers are based on transistor circuits, rather than relay or lamp switches, as on the Z3 and ENIAK ", However, their basic ar the architecture is much more like the architecture of the first. " hi
              2. alexmach 4 March 2020 16: 26 New
                • 2
                • 3
                -1
                not at all ... do not confuse a computer with a computer

                I do not confuse. ENIAK even has its own word electronic. Before him, too, there were computers, including purely mechanical and electro-mechanical and “maling properties”.
                1. ser56 4 March 2020 16: 31 New
                  • 3
                  • 1
                  +2
                  Quote: alexmach
                  I do not confuse.

                  Quote: ser56
                  I hope you heard ..

                  it seems not - to argue those I see the point! hi
                  1. alexmach 4 March 2020 16: 34 New
                    • 1
                    • 2
                    -1
                    I agree, your opinion is also reasoned.
                    Next, will you defend the initial thesis that scores are also a computer?
                    Does it make sense to argue about the history of computing in the context of the modernization of Peter the Great ... let's stop here.
                    1. Voltsky 4 March 2020 17: 27 New
                      • 2
                      • 1
                      +1
                      give punch cards :)
              3. Fat
                Fat 5 March 2020 12: 47 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                Quote: ser56
                I hope you heard ...

                Z3 is like a Roucher (German) A computer, a Roucher, an arithmometer, a clerk with an inkwell ... it's any calculator, usually digital)))
            2. The comment was deleted.
      2. Voltsky 4 March 2020 17: 19 New
        • 2
        • 2
        0

        and this is a quantum computer and the future is possible behind it :) And yes, you can be cunning for a long time without delving into the fact that in the 70s it was a super computer, and now it is already inferior to the laptop in computing power.
        ps
        And I didn’t say that ships of the 1st rank were not needed, there was no need to distort
      3. Firelake 5 March 2020 13: 37 New
        • 0
        • 1
        -1
        Compare power. And then play with the meanings.
        1. Voltsky 5 March 2020 19: 01 New
          • 0
          • 1
          -1
          Quote: FireLake
          Compare power. And then play with the meanings.

          kW? mHrz? or tFlops? you what to compare and what to compare?
          If you are talking about quantum putters, then at the moment they are more experimental, and secondly, the goals are slightly different; apple - they’re not matching pear ...
          1. Firelake 5 March 2020 23: 54 New
            • 0
            • 1
            -1
            With what you want. I already work with voxels at home now. And 10 years ago he couldn’t.
            1. Voltsky 6 March 2020 00: 22 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              and ?!
              How does this contradict my words ?! I’m just saying that we are developing, and with the same sizes, our productivity is greater.
              Sculpting ?!
              Or did you decide to shift the argument towards 3D ?! I’ll punish though Houdini Maya and not a sculptor :)
              1. Firelake 6 March 2020 09: 34 New
                • 0
                • 1
                -1
                I didn’t guess))) but the essence of my answer to you was that now electronics plays an increasingly important role in the frill. And if earlier (20 years ago) suo for an eagle was supposed to occupy a house, now it can be put into a box. And the larger the ship, the easier it is to find it.
                And the second one. Three of these ships will not solve anything. It would be better if the boats riveted
    6. Cyrus 5 March 2020 19: 10 New
      • 1
      • 2
      -1
      I sincerely wish you that when the time comes, you proudly meet the enemy AUS on the bridge of the corvette ...
      1. Voltsky 5 March 2020 19: 12 New
        • 0
        • 1
        -1
        Do you often wish people well ?! Why not immediately on the tanker tanker, there is a lot of fuel and 0 weapons ?!
        The fight against AUG and even more so AUS => raid YES using tactical nuclear weapons, I will not exchange a ship for a ship
  • mark1 4 March 2020 06: 59 New
    • 12
    • 3
    +9
    When you say, Ivan Vasilyevich, the impression is that you are raving.

    1. Peter the Great - project 11442
    2. Cable routes, cable routes ...
    3.Without a qualitative update of the air defense / missile defense (anti-satellite) and a quantitative increase (4 times) there is nothing to do at sea, even with unmanned boats.
    4.Functions of the arsenal ship. The cells should be universal, both for SAM and for various types of missile defense and missile defense.
    5. The role of PLO due to the developed air group of drones and drones-pl.
    All other actions at the level of half measures make sense with the planned decommissioning of the ship in 2030.
    1. Serg65 4 March 2020 09: 05 New
      • 9
      • 2
      +7
      submission of material raises questions, even the project number is messed up: "Peter the Great" was built according to the project 1144, code "Orlan"

      It smiled me too bully
      Quote: mark1
      All other actions at the level of half measures make sense with the planned decommissioning of the ship in 2030.

      This is the whole point!
      1. timokhin-aa 4 March 2020 10: 56 New
        • 8
        • 0
        +8
        It smiled me too


        Strictly formally in the USSR, the number after the dot indicated the modification in the project, and five-digit numbering without a dot is already the Russian Federation.

        This is the whole point!


        These ships with their hulls can last a very long time, and repeatedly modernized. There, the resource of the building is about 50-60 years old, if you are not in the know. And even more, experts have no consensus. But 50 is definitely there.
        So there you can later add drones and lasers (energy allows) and generally anything.
        These ships certainly did not need to be built, just as now there is no need to build a "Leader" (for now). But they already exist and must "repulse" themselves.
        1. Serg65 4 March 2020 12: 05 New
          • 8
          • 1
          +7
          Quote: timokhin-aa
          Strictly formally in the USSR, the figure after the dot indicated a modification in the project,

          But at the same time, pr.1144 or 1144.2, pr.1143 or pr 1143.5, or pr 1143.7 and not pr 1144 modification 2 was written in any document!
          Quote: timokhin-aa
          and five-digit numbering without a dot is already the Russian Federation.

          Which does not change the essence of the matter!
          Quote: timokhin-aa
          These ships with their hulls can last a very long time, and repeatedly modernized. TAM housing resource somewhere 50-60 years

          but as if ..
          Quote: timokhin-aa
          experts have no consensus

          at the same time, the experts themselves do not know anything because ..
          Quote: timokhin-aa
          50 is definitely there.

          And this is not looking at your words about Takr Frunze!
          Quote: timokhin-aa
          These ships certainly did not need to be built, just as now there is no need to build a "Leader" (for now). But they already exist and must "repulse" themselves.

          laughing It’s hard to carry, but it’s a pity to throw it away! 100 billion upgrades = 5 new super Gorshkovs, or 240 KR-RCC + 480 anti-aircraft missiles spaced on 5 platforms! As far as I remember, during the Union the price of one Orlan also equaled the price of five Atlanteans!
          1. timokhin-aa 4 March 2020 12: 29 New
            • 2
            • 0
            +2
            But at the same time, pr.1144 or 1144.2, pr.1143 or pr 1143.5, or pr 1143.7 and not pr 1144 modification 2 was written in any document!


            It was written "in general" about all ships as 1144, for a particular ship, if it was important to indicate the difference with the head one (in technical documentation, for example), 1144.2 was written

            Compare with 20380-20385-20386, including on the "technique".

            And this is not looking at your words about Takr Frunze!


            By the way, the bulkheads and decks rotted there, and the hull itself - "in places and a bit." In theory, if you wanted to rebuild it, it would be why, because you have to naturally cut out everything except the building itself, and repair the building. But Peter and Nakhimov in a much better condition are incomparable. In general, a new one can be said. Mostly.

            It’s hard to carry, but it’s a pity to throw it away! 100 billion upgrades = 5 new super Gorshkovs, or 240 KR-RCC + 480 anti-aircraft missiles spaced on 5 platforms!


            Yes, and if I were asked ten years ago whether it would be necessary to roll so much money into Nakhimov, I would say no. But now it’s too late, they are spent. Now the question is only in Peter, with available options:

            1. On the needles
            2. Repair without modernization
            3. Repair with replacement of KRO - personally, I think it is approx. 30 billion plus to p. 2
            4. "Death Star" a la Nakhimov.

            I am for option 3.
            1. ser56 4 March 2020 15: 56 New
              • 2
              • 1
              +1
              Quote: timokhin-aa
              I am for option 3.

              and in vain, option 2 is optimal ...
              1. Petrol cutter 4 March 2020 21: 18 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                I tend to agree with this point of view.
              2. timokhin-aa 5 March 2020 14: 06 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                What is the point in such a ship?
                1. ser56 5 March 2020 14: 19 New
                  • 1
                  • 1
                  0
                  Quote: timokhin-aa
                  What is the point in such a ship?

                  District air defense, a serious strike potential on ships ... as for strikes along the coast, you can put a couple of containers with calibers ... there is enough space there ... It’s stupid to upgrade such ships seriously - these are white elephants, they will work out their resources and needles ... It is also necessary to build a new one in a serially large series ... You yourself very reasonably argued on the example of frigates ... request
                  1. timokhin-aa 5 March 2020 14: 23 New
                    • 2
                    • 0
                    +2
                    District air defense,


                    Not justified in itself for the money. Together with other features, yes, apart from them, no.

                    serious strike potential on ships


                    The fact of the matter is that it is no longer.
                    1. ser56 5 March 2020 15: 29 New
                      • 1
                      • 1
                      0
                      Quote: timokhin-aa
                      Not justified in itself for the money.

                      remember the example of Syria and sending there 1164
                      Quote: timokhin-aa
                      Together with other features, yes, apart from them, no.

                      this opportunity already exists and it does not need to be spent on it, except for current expenses ...
                      Quote: timokhin-aa
                      The fact of the matter is that it is no longer.

                      then you need to insert glasses for 2-3 onyx into the mines, according to type 885 ...
                      1. ser56 5 March 2020 15: 30 New
                        • 1
                        • 1
                        0
                        Quote: ser56
                        mine glasses for 2-3 onyx, type 885 ...

                        or just containers on the deck - right on top of the shaft ... repeat
                      2. timokhin-aa 6 March 2020 07: 23 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        this opportunity already exists and it does not need to be spent on it, except for current expenses ...


                        Repair is expensive. It’s also not serious to save on launchers, everything will have to be spent early there, so can you get serious functionality for this?

                        then you need to insert glasses for 2-3 onyx into the mines, according to type 885 ...


                        And what to work along the shore? You offer to save on matches and not get anything.
                      3. ser56 6 March 2020 13: 29 New
                        • 0
                        • 1
                        -1
                        Quote: timokhin-aa
                        what to work on the shore?

                        calibers and onyx from one cell ... request By the way - is it really necessary to use such ships to work along the coast? Hiding stealth cannot be achieved - for this, it’s better to submarine, forces without nuclear warheads too ... request
                        Quote: timokhin-aa
                        You offer to save on matches and not get anything.

                        No, learning from partners - how to maintain a fleet ...
          2. alexmach 4 March 2020 22: 07 New
            • 0
            • 1
            -1
            I'm for option 3

            And what can you say about the modernization of the existing Atlantes. Is it appropriate?
            1. timokhin-aa 5 March 2020 14: 24 New
              • 2
              • 0
              +2
              Do not answer without calculations. I would like the Navy to calculate such a project, with the replacement of the radar and inclined launchers under the Onyx and Caliber. But I think that the Navy will not.
          3. Saxahorse 4 March 2020 22: 09 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            Quote: timokhin-aa
            By the way, the bulkheads and decks rotted there, and the hull itself - "in places and a bit." In theory, if you want to rebuild it, it would be why

            The empty case itself is generally worth a penny. The question is what was expensive and useful that Peter survived in order to repair and upgrade it. It may be generally easier to order a corps in China and rearrange everything that was useful in Peter the Great into it. The entire power plant for example.
            1. timokhin-aa 5 March 2020 14: 07 New
              • 2
              • 0
              +2
              Peter is more or less okay for that age. The ship did not rot near the wall, went to the seas, it was watched, it entered service in the late 90s.
      2. Cyrus 5 March 2020 19: 11 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Yeah, and when the time comes, it will be too late to build.
  • The leader of the Redskins 4 March 2020 07: 13 New
    • 20
    • 4
    +16
    I see that experts got into a dispute. I, as a non-marine person, can only state that it was interesting to read the article. Thanks to the author.
  • 5-9
    5-9 4 March 2020 08: 28 New
    • 6
    • 6
    0
    How much will the upgrade plus a major overhaul cost? 100 lards? Based on the amount, you can think how many 2038X or 22350 can be built in return. See how many missiles and missile defense / missile defense on them will be a PLUS to those on unmodified Peta.
    And let's leave these mriies about the raiding campaigns of two 1144s (against whom and most importantly why and in what situation ???) around the world's orans .... and you can show the flag with Granites and S-30FM ... and more how to show, taking into account its appearance!
    1. timokhin-aa 4 March 2020 10: 50 New
      • 3
      • 1
      +2
      How much will the upgrade cost plus a major overhaul? 100 lards?


      No, this completely rebuilt Nakhimov got up with that kind of money.
      1. 5-9
        5-9 4 March 2020 12: 16 New
        • 0
        • 1
        -1
        Petya is not supposed to be "completely rebuilt" during modernization? Only three quarters? Let it be 75 lards. Does this essentially change anything?
        1. timokhin-aa 4 March 2020 12: 31 New
          • 3
          • 1
          +2
          What is supposed there is now being decided. I think that the difference between repairs and repairs with the addition of Caliber will be 30-35 billion. In fact, we get a carrier rocket weapons with dozens of missiles / missiles.
          1. 5-9
            5-9 4 March 2020 12: 46 New
            • 1
            • 4
            -3
            And how much are 22350 and 20385?
            Why is he another carrier? Do we have enough Caliber carriers? Expensive rocket (American analogue of Tomahawk TLAM-E) cost 1,4 lama bucks in 2004. It is pointless to use them massively (see the results of the strike of 61 and 110 missiles on the ATS), several missiles for a TV picture or special operation, and with an RTO or even 636 can be pulled. With special warheads, mass application is also not particularly necessary. Or do we have to apply them in Madascar to which RTOs and diesel-electric submarines are not reached? So there are 22350.
            Those. to conquer the World Ocean (well, for some reason we will need it, but it is not clear why) in the decisive battle in the North Atlantic with the USA we will not recapture 10 such TARKRs, but for everything else there are cheaper solutions. The question WHY in conditions of limited resources / dough is not resolved for me. I understand that there would be a situation, that we should modernize - for one or two and without a hitch and for a year, but nothing new can be built like 22350 ... and so on ...
            1. timokhin-aa 4 March 2020 12: 54 New
              • 4
              • 0
              +4
              Do we have enough Caliber carriers?


              Sorely lacking. The entire salvo of the Pacific Fleet is 4 missiles with the Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky diesel-electric submarine. The entire salvo of the entire Navy is less than one ship of the US Navy, South Korea or China.

              It is pointless to use them massively (see the results of the strike of 61 and 110 missiles on the ATS), several missiles for a TV picture or special operation, and with an RTO or even 636 can be pulled.


              This is not so, it is not necessary to ostentatious peacetime attacks with a normally held strike, where there are missiles, aircraft and LC missiles to compare by effect. Unsuppressed anti-missile defense does not crack.

              I understand that there would be a situation that to modernize - we will build one or two without a bitch and a year, but nothing new can be built like 22350 ... and so on ...


              The question is what modern cruisers are doing in Sevmash, and 22350 are building in the North East and hypothetically can be in other factories, but not in the Sevmash basin. The construction of frigates is limited by the supply of gearboxes for them, and this cannot be accelerated quickly.
              Assuming about 80 KPs ​​on the upgraded cruiser, we get that we need to build to replace 3 frigates 22350 with the plus for the maximum productivity that we have now, and even with the introduction of new construction sites or the issuance of an order for them from another shipyard.
              Three frigates are just Nakhimov.
              A properly modernized Peter - 1 frigate for money and 3 for striking power. Bonus - unlimited range, 2-3 helicopters instead of the 1st and armor.
              All is obvious.
              1. 5-9
                5-9 4 March 2020 13: 20 New
                • 1
                • 4
                -3
                For whom are you going to massively shoot Caliber with Pacific Fleet? Nippon and 8 pieces with special warheads - for the eyes. And will Petya be transferred to the Pacific Fleet?
                I’m trying to explain to you that the issue of holes in the UKKS can be secondary to the presence of the Caliber itself as such in connection with their price. Well, this one, the typical Burke load is 22 Axes, Tiki is 28 Axes .... the Japanese have no CRBDs at all.

                These are the two most massive blows of the Kyrgyz Republic in the history of mankind, if you do not know ....

                Not obvious. It is necessary to look - the unfinished Peter with 20 Granites + 22350 with everything-everything in it against the modernized Peter with 80 holes of the UKKS.
                1. timokhin-aa 4 March 2020 14: 35 New
                  • 7
                  • 1
                  +6
                  For whom are you going to massively shoot Caliber with Pacific Fleet? Nippon and 8 pieces with special warheads - for the eyes.


                  Calm down about Special BCH. In the military doctrine, everything on this subject is chewed quite intelligibly. In response to some border incident, there will be no special warheads.
                  So you need a volley.

                  In addition, you forget that there are offensive wars, and not just defensive ones.
              2. ser56 4 March 2020 15: 59 New
                • 1
                • 1
                0
                Quote: timokhin-aa
                and it’s quick to not speed up.

                what prevents to build a workshop + stand and increase production capabilities?
                Quote: timokhin-aa
                All is obvious.

                namely, the content is ruinous ...
                Quote: timokhin-aa
                Bonus - unlimited range,

                and restrictions on visiting ports for visits
                1. alexmach 4 March 2020 22: 36 New
                  • 0
                  • 1
                  -1
                  what prevents to build a workshop + stand and increase production capabilities?

                  How long did it take to build a stand last time and what kind of org resources did it cost?
                  1. ser56 5 March 2020 13: 11 New
                    • 1
                    • 1
                    0
                    Quote: alexmach
                    How long did it take to build a stand last time and what kind of org resources did it cost?

                    2nd building is always easier ... but there will be no problems in the future ... request
              3. alexmach 5 March 2020 01: 24 New
                • 0
                • 1
                -1
                The entire salvo of the entire Navy is less than one ship of the United States, South Korea or China.

                I was not too lazy and counted, counted 148 missiles.
                Together with the new 5 buoys 2 karakurt.

                PS: Forgot Severodvinsk another 40
                1. timokhin-aa 5 March 2020 14: 09 New
                  • 3
                  • 0
                  +3
                  Well, yes, I apparently lagged behind life.
            2. alexmach 4 March 2020 12: 57 New
              • 1
              • 1
              0
              And how much are 22350 and 20385?

              It’s still reasonable to ask how fast they can be built at all.

              Do we have enough Caliber carriers?

              You will not believe. Taki is not enough. That's why RTOs are being built.

              Massively useless

              Only in large quantities does it make sense to use them against a serious adversary.
              1. Nemchinov Vl 4 March 2020 15: 05 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                Quote: alexmach
                А how much are 22350 and 20385?

                Still reasonable to ask a with what pace can they be built at all.
                This is perhaps the main thing !! Well, not 20385 (price / combat capabilities, - from the word "Sin" !!), in no case, namely 22350.1 (at 24 UVP) ...

                Quote: alexmach
                Do we have enough Caliber carriers?

                You will not believe. Taki is not enough. That's why RTOs are building.

                Here I am not at all sure. I think that here more lobbying USC smells ?!! ...

                Quote: 5-9
                I’m trying to explain to you that the issue of holes in the UKKS can be secondary [i] in relation to the presence of the Gauges themselves as such [/ i] in connection with their price
                It is a logical argument, I agree.

                Quote: timokhin-aa
                Building frigates limited by supplies of gearboxes for them, and it does not quickly accelerate.
                That's it ! And just this direction, Now we need to be especially careful and stimulate, but also control
                !!!
                I repeat, it’s probably the hundredth time that not a single NPO Saturn enterprise, not a single Zvezda Reductor enterprise (without creating similarand in the marine gas turbine engine building, and in the creation of gearboxes for offshore power plants/, enterprises, do not stretch !!! AND all shipbuilding programs will stall ?! That’s the trouble, and since 2014, nothing has been done in this direction ?! !!! Zwah !!)

                Quote: timokhin-aa
                Assuming about 80 KPs ​​on the upgraded cruiser, we get that we need to build to replace 3 frigates 22350 with the plus for the maximum productivity that we have now, and even with the introduction of new construction sites or the issuance of an order for them from another shipyard.

                Frigate pr. 22350, for today, is "piece", and already on that "expensive" ?! How to solve the problem of filling the fleet with “first ranks” when the other projects are “behind” (or say “not ready to go up the mountain”) ?! And this, while the motor resource of BOD 1155, is inexorably melting ?! Or maybe you need to reconsider the loading of shipbuilding plants / shipyards that are capable (well, at least in principle) of building first-class BNC ?! And already since 2020, to lay down 5-6 units of 22350.1 (for 24 UVP, I had in mind. Well, that is, as "Amelko"), in the current and next year. And if for enterprises, then: 1) "Amber" - it can mortgage (at least one FR 22350.1), in addition to the already under construction 2 BDK 1171.1 (There are seats for rent from 2-3 fishing vessels, for Kamchatka, vacated ...) ?!, 2) Severnaya Verf shipyard (Zhdanov plant named after them) - lay 1 or even 2 (taking into account the fact that Kasatonov and Thundering will still be handed over to the fleet in the near future, and Golovko will be launched )?!, 3) “Baltic Shipyard” - if of course, the tenacity towards the construction of icebreakers (at least for a while will decrease), can lay from 1 to 3 units, during this and the next calendar year ?! 4) Kerch "Gulf", - getting rid of "Karakurt" (without power plants, ie towing them let's say to Pella, wait for the engines), can afford to lay at least one fr. 22350.1 this year, and another one next?!, 5) The “Plant in Bolshoi Kamen” (and which has so much money during the modernization / reorganization / construction) will build tankers / lighter / gas carriers ?! Or starting this year will be able to lay at least one at 22350.1 ...?! As you can see, I have already counted / listed at least 5 enterprises !!!
                1. alexmach 4 March 2020 15: 25 New
                  • 1
                  • 1
                  0
                  Here I am not at all sure. It seems to me that there is more of an OSK lobbying here!! ...

                  There was information about the task to double the amount of PU formulated formally.
                2. Protos 5 March 2020 10: 34 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  In Crimea, in addition to the Gulf, there are shipyards at More and Shipyard named after Ordzhanikidze yes
                3. alexmach 7 March 2020 17: 22 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  As you can see, I have already counted / listed at least 5 enterprises !!!

                  Great, but where is all this splendor to take power units then? And other equipment in the right quantity is available?
                  1. Nemchinov Vl 8 March 2020 02: 53 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    Quote: alexmach
                    Great, but where is all this splendor to take power units then? And other equipment in the right quantity is available?
                    1) at first “exert maximum effort” (naturally financing well, but also maximally controlling the spending of these funds, as in Beria !! not for nothing that Stalin set "to control" aviation industry during the war, and then to the rocket industry !!) enterprise "Star Reducer" and NPO "Saturn". So you can get from six to eight units DGTA-M55R, during the first three calendar years. And in parallel, - p. 2) Create now (since 2014, so too much has been lost !!) for another such enterprise (and the creation / construction of gearboxes and marine gas turbine engines /see com. earlier/). These enterprises are necessary !!!. In three or four years they will begin to produce the first units .... During this time, the hulls of 5-6 frigates laid down this and next year will be formed (to varying degrees of readiness, but ...) and will need power installation. Given such features as Stalin and Beria sought: the main thing is “the will of the state to achieve the set goals,” while “the most adequate funding, and control over the spending of these allocated funds,” everything will turn out !!
    2. Cyrus 5 March 2020 19: 18 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      And how much will it cost the death of young guys who will be put into battle on obviously weak ships against a obviously stronger opponent (there is a shikoko redoubt beats off on the pot 4 on each side, this is one Hornet), and there will be 10 on each side, what a boule?
  • Alex_59 4 March 2020 08: 59 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    Previously, there was an article about battleships with the statement that even after the Second World War the battleship was such a cool and irreplaceable thing. 1144 is the battleship of our era. It is a pity and not prestigious to throw out, and to drag is very difficult and expensive. A painful fact, but a fact.
    I can already see how, after 50 years, alternative people will write about what super-weapons atomic RRCs were and how they were actively used even after the end of the Cold War. We should send a message there in the future, informing us that Russia simply does not have ships of the 1st rank, they are not building, and they have to squeeze everything that is possible from the Soviet legacy. And do a good face with a bad game.
  • Maxim364364 4 March 2020 09: 22 New
    • 5
    • 3
    +2
    The cruiser is ahead of its time and is now in great demand - is it a joke that a full-fledged S-300 air defense regiment (maybe they will be delivered after modernization of the S-400), almost a hundred missiles are not a joke, but also air defense of the near zone of the Dagger and Cortica for a total of 200 pieces, even standing at the pier, the Navy base alone can cover up well, and there are no rivals at all in the sea.
    1. Brylevsky 4 March 2020 09: 54 New
      • 5
      • 0
      +5
      and there are no rivals at all in the sea

      There is safety in numbers. And at sea too ...
      1. timokhin-aa 4 March 2020 10: 57 New
        • 6
        • 1
        +5
        No one says they will be alone.
        1. Brylevsky 4 March 2020 15: 43 New
          • 8
          • 1
          +7
          No one says they will be alone.

          In my opinion, if only the fate of the 2nd Pacific Squadron would not be repeated when there were more than one. And so, yes - the ships turned out for the feast of the eye. Put on a shelf, and do not touch. What would not work, as with Tirpitz or Bismarck. Alexander! Too many of those reading your wonderful articles are engaged in "masturbation" on the topic: "Russia is a great sea power" and worst of all, those who are in the General Staff are infected with this disease. A hundred billion rubles! And it didn’t, because a classmate is waiting in line ... and then we transfer money for the treatment of cancer patients by SMS, because there is no one to treat them in Russia with. For what? What would amuse your imperial vanity? Or "pussy" to measure? They say that in Japan a whole branch of the railway worked for just one schoolgirl. She had nothing to get to school, except on the train ... They wanted to close the branch as economically unprofitable. But for the sake of just one girl, the train continued to walk ... We cannot fix the road from the village to the school, - "There is no money!" The state is not saved by the cruiser, the state is saved by people. It is necessary to think about people, and not about past greatness. Otherwise, there will be no one to serve those cruisers. I mean "representatives of the state-forming people."
          1. timokhin-aa 5 March 2020 13: 59 New
            • 2
            • 0
            +2
            What would not work, as with Tirpitz or Bismarck. Alexander! Too many of those reading your wonderful articles are engaged in “masturbation” on the topic: “Russia is a great sea power” and worst of all, those who are in the General Staff are infected with this disease. A hundred billion rubles! And this is not a chapel, because a classmate is standing in line ...


            Everything is much more complicated on the one hand, as the General Staff also sunk the Navy as a type of aircraft under Serdyukov.
            As for up to 100 billion, this money has already been spent on Nakhimov, the question is how to get along with Peter at a lower cost, but to maintain the military significance of this ship.

            It’s necessary to think about people, and not about past greatness


            We are entering a decade, where caring for people and military power is about the same thing. And greatness to me personally is deeply on my side, I am interested in the number of missiles on board and autonomy.
            Greatness has no practical significance; volley of missiles has.

            If it depended on me, then these ships would never have been built. But now they are and must work out what is already invested in them.
        2. Nemchinov Vl 4 March 2020 16: 38 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Quote: timokhin-aa
          No one says that they will be alone.

          I don’t want either you (SW. Alexander), nor myself, and many others to upset, but ... As fast as 22350.1, and as very soon, due to the exhaustion of the GEM resource (due to the hopelessly tough / intensive operation), BOD 1155 will begin to die out / stop in the next 2-4 years .... But it comes to that
          Quote: timokhin-aa
          ... that they will be alone.
          . When “Amelko” or “Chichagov” can get to the Pacific Fleet ?! How many BOD will be still on the go by that time ?! How many KPUG will be possible from ships of the 1st rank, there to form (provided that the "Varyag" will still be able to serve) ?! And how many ships can be, except these (but most likely this one KPUG !!), to separate from the Pacific Fleet, say for the formation of the same 10 OPESK (which, according to your statements, in earlier articles, it makes perfect sense) ?!
          1. timokhin-aa 5 March 2020 13: 59 New
            • 2
            • 1
            +1
            How can a refusal to upgrade KRO in Petra accelerate the construction of frigates?
            1. Nemchinov Vl 6 March 2020 23: 11 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Quote: timokhin-aa
              How can a refusal to upgrade KRO in Petra accelerate the construction of frigates?
              The fact is that the reconstruction / re-equipment of the cruiser’s hull for dozens of 8-cell UVP UKSK (for 80 pieces of missiles)?!, 1) This is already a considerable alteration of the case (in any case, it seems to me) 2) which, in turn, will pull over the re-laying of cable routes (including power and supply) not for 20 Granites, but for 80 Caliber / Onyx ... I don’t know how much it will cost, but I guess that the cost of one (if not more) 22350.1 frigates ...?! 3) In this way it is possible; really limited to repairing power plants ?! The main thing here, - Price issue (i.e. real difference just repair the power plant and your suggestions with the upgrade of KRO) ?! 4) If this difference is large (that is, it will cost one frigate or more), then it’s more reasonable to invest these funds in the construction of frigates, using today, other shipyards (in parallel with Severnaya) stimulating them (Amber / Bay / Big Stone) in this way, and of course with proper control of the intended use of these funds.
              1. timokhin-aa 10 March 2020 12: 36 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                The fact is that the reconstruction / re-equipment of the cruiser’s hull for dozens of 8-cell UVK UKSK (for 80 missiles)?!, 1) This is already a considerable alteration of the hull (in any case, it seems to me),


                If we limit ourselves to the volumes where the Granites are located, then the alterations are not fatal.

                2) which, in turn, will lead to the re-laying of the cable routes (including power and supply) not for 20 Granites, but for 80 Caliber / Onyx ... I don’t know how much it will cost, but I guess that the cost of one (if not more) 22350.1 frigate ...?!


                The fact is that cable routes are already changed. That is, we either tumble down 20-30 yards and get a repaired ship, or 35-45 and we get it with a new missile weapon complex. The difference is one corvette.

                then it’s wiser to invest these funds in the construction of frigates, using today, other shipyards (in parallel with the “Severnaya”) stimulating them (Amber / Bay / Big Stone) in this way, and of course with proper control of the intended use of these funds.


                Well, let's compare - get in 6 years one frigate with 24 cells and a range of 4000 miles at 14 knots (if I don’t confuse) or a cruiser with uncontrolled autonomy with 2-3 helicopters and 60-80 missiles?
    2. Alex_59 4 March 2020 10: 37 New
      • 3
      • 1
      +2
      Quote: Maksim364364
      Is it a joke a full-fledged S-300 air defense regiment

      Two on-load tap-changers on a ship. On the regiment does not pull. Two divisions. In a regiment of 3-5 divisions usually.
      But if we draw here the remaining means of air defense of the ship, then with a stretch we can assume that the mixed air defense brigade corresponds. 2 S-300P battalions, 2 Thor battalions, 2-3 ZSU batteries, and there’s just one ASUshka for all of this (in the form of a ship BIUS) - in total, it’ll be typed into the brigade, though for the air defense forces there is some completely insane state.
  • Name Surname 4 March 2020 10: 03 New
    • 6
    • 0
    +6
    Off-topic, but is there any news on Chabanenko?
    Is there really something done?
    well, except for "beating"
    1. timokhin-aa 4 March 2020 10: 51 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      Have not yet. How will I write.
      1. Nemchinov Vl 8 March 2020 13: 13 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: timokhin-aa
        Have not yet. How will I write.
        and if possible, uv. Alexander, devote the topic to the possibilities for today's industry for the production of HACs ?! It is very interesting about the state of affairs at the Taganrog "Surf", and the Kirov "Ladoga" ?! Whether the possibilities of creating a SJC (modern, similar to Zvezda-2 and Zarya-3.3., Or something newer and more efficient), and the capabilities of these enterprises at the present time, to meet the defense shipbuilding requirements of the state defense order, are preserved. It would be very interesting.
  • Voltsky 4 March 2020 10: 24 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: BREAKTHROUGH READY
    you probably don’t visit marine-related articles too often. Fantasies about absurd superlinkors are one of the most popular on this site.

    What for !? Battleship - archaic; nothing negates the fact that few modern ships will survive a salvo of guns of a battleship. But the missiles are long-range and do not require monstrous sizes to withstand the volley of their own guns. + Modern technologies allow equipment to be made compact, and therefore reduce the crew due to the high level of automation

    it reminded me of how the same person said that fools Americans want ship-rocket batteries, and at the same time campaigned for “Leader” with 200 missiles :)
    load the floating platform with containers and give direction and provide air defense
  • Warrior MorePhoto 4 March 2020 10: 51 New
    • 5
    • 1
    +4
    "In the case of a hypothetical war against Russia, a breakthrough of a pair of such ships into the open ocean will force any enemy to remove dozens of ships and patrol planes from the tasks of attacking the Russian Federation." - Two squadrons of f 35 with long-range missiles and we will need to think about how to save more than 2000 crew members.
    1. timokhin-aa 4 March 2020 11: 12 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      Is not a fact. The carriers of these squadrons must somehow be nearby.
      1. Cyrus 5 March 2020 19: 28 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        LC Bismarck disagrees with you.
    2. Rakovor 4 March 2020 11: 16 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Yes, no one will save them, nothing. Dear author, apparently not very well remembers the history of wars at sea. For, as this story shows, the whole raider war (at least in the era of steam) sooner or later (usually sooner) ended in the destruction of specialized raiders without causing the latter any significant damage to maritime trade.
      1. timokhin-aa 5 March 2020 14: 15 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Here the question is somewhat wider.
        https://topwar.ru/160673-rejdery-protiv-krejserov.html
        https://topwar.ru/162786-stroim-flot-ataki-slabogo-poteri-silnogo.html
    3. History, as I recall, has already seen such an example: the German Tirpitz and Bismarck. The very fact of the existence of these ships terrified the British ...
      It must be assumed that you prophesy the same fate for our Nikhimov and Peter?
      1. timokhin-aa 5 March 2020 14: 15 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        https://topwar.ru/160673-rejdery-protiv-krejserov.html
        https://topwar.ru/162786-stroim-flot-ataki-slabogo-poteri-silnogo.html
  • Warrior MorePhoto 4 March 2020 11: 18 New
    • 3
    • 4
    -1
    100 billion + it’s not clear what’s happening with Peter ... and it wouldn’t be more logical to leave these ships and build a dock for the construction of large ships - 22350M for the “near” perspective, “Leader” for the middle perspective and for the future may be for aircraft carriers.

    Let me remind you the cost of 22350 - about 500 million.

    Except for theft, I don’t see anything here. A huge bureaucratic apparatus, and what approximate repairs they cannot calculate on paper, and what we get from this, consider how the same money can be used in another way.

    To throw out 100 billion for a project that will already be backward at the exit or invest in the future (doc), which in the future, when allocating funds will make it possible to lay simultaneously, for example, two Leaders.
    1. timokhin-aa 4 March 2020 11: 28 New
      • 3
      • 1
      +2
      100 billion + it’s not clear what’s happening with Peter ... and it wouldn’t be more logical to leave these ships and build a dock for the construction of large ships - 22350M for the “near” perspective, “Leader” for the middle perspective and for the future may be for aircraft carriers.


      Money for Nakhimov has already been spent. You need to spend less on Peter, that's all, keep within the cost of 1,5 corvettes and it will be normal.
    2. frog 4 March 2020 12: 10 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      What are the "Leaders", dear ?? At such prices ??? Oh, about the timing of the construction, I'm just silent. A pair of launchers for the very "Caliber" and the equipment pulled to a full-fledged watermelon. What is there so much to cost ?? The mastered production, one might say, is serial ..... There are no radars ..... And there are still many things ..... And for all this - a modest watermelon. Well, at least not green ......
    3. 5-9
      5-9 4 March 2020 12: 20 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Pitsot milionov what 22350? So the Su-35S 2 lard stands, the Su-34 - one and a half ...
    4. Cyrus 5 March 2020 19: 29 New
      • 0
      • 1
      -1
      And if the future does not come?
  • Warrior MorePhoto 4 March 2020 11: 28 New
    • 4
    • 1
    +3
    Quote: timokhin-aa
    Is not a fact. The carriers of these squadrons must somehow be nearby.


    There are enough bases near the stripes, respectively 1500 km from the coast all overlap.
    There remains, accordingly, large open spaces (Atlantic, quiet), and there is AUG, for this you just need to approach + - 1000-1500 km. All. Ala Ulu write letters.
    1. timokhin-aa 4 March 2020 14: 37 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      There remains, accordingly, large open spaces (Atlantic, quiet), and there is AUG, for this you just need to approach + - 1000-1500 km.


      500 to strike at NK, and all this time they will not be on the home front. In addition, there are various nuances, such as "pull the AUG in an ambush of submarines" and the cruiser is quite out of place here.
      Although the risks are clear, but it will not be a one-goal game.
  • Igor Tikhomirov 4 March 2020 11: 55 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    On the ships of the Russian Imperial Fleet, special attention was paid to the decoration of officer and, especially, admiral's cabins. What about this issue?
  • bandabas 4 March 2020 13: 48 New
    • 3
    • 3
    0
    We don’t have money? We have no money only for the people. Be fruitful, multiply and die quickly.
  • RusKosTen 4 March 2020 14: 15 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    The fact that Nakhimov turned out to be so expensive, I suppose, is connected with the import substitution of a large number of components (primarily Ukrainian ones) with domestic samples, which probably did not exist in nature at the time of the conclusion of the contract for modernization. But I think it’s impossible to turn off the modernization of Peter, we will again get a variety of grades - here is one thing, here is another, piece ships, etc. Why it is impossible to make car kits of replaced equipment at once for both ships simultaneously? This will reduce the cost of modernization of Peter at times. And the whole system will be debugged, shipyard specialists trained, cooperative chains debugged. No, it’s necessary to take over everything again and pour a bunch of dough into the new unit prodigy again.
  • iouris 4 March 2020 15: 20 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    Not capable ... already in the field of ballet. Something needs to be done so that at least thirty years later ... We must start from kindergarten.
  • ser56 4 March 2020 15: 47 New
    • 5
    • 2
    +3
    Again, white elephants ... and even the age of 30 years ... it's time to write off!
    Maybe enough to build a fleet of samples? request
    How to maintain and repair these single monsters?
    Nakhimov’s modernization is essentially squandering folk remedies! Which the author showed ... request
  • Legat_01 4 March 2020 16: 15 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Under the conditions of modern Russian realities, saving on the fleet is not the best, but quite predictable phenomenon. The most reasonable solution here seems to be an emphasis on the most important programs, primarily related to new ships. In the case of Peter the Great, much depends on his current state ...
  • Newone 4 March 2020 20: 55 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    Article "+".
    “it remains to hope that common sense will prevail, and correct, balanced decisions will be made with respect to Peter the Great,” namely, Peter the Great will receive the same modernization as Nakhimov.
    Yes it is expensive. But it will already be definitely cheaper than on Nakhimov: the documentation and equipment of the production are ALREADY made (for the same type of Nakhimov).
    Cable routes, in any case, it is better to replace, and this is a significant part of the cost.
    "Granites" in any case have to be changed. Restoring their production is huge and wasted money. Making rockets for installation: this decision had to be made 10 years ago. Now it is a lot of money and a lot of time and it is not clear what will come out in the end.
    The fort needs to be modernized. What is now outdated. By the time of exit from modernization, it will become obsolete.
    1. timokhin-aa 5 March 2020 14: 17 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      namely, "Peter the Great" will receive the same modernization as Nakhimov.


      This is unjustified, its combat effectiveness is growing disproportionately invested. It is better to simply throw out the Granites and replace them with UKKS, the rest will be upgraded to a minimum, without rebuilding and repair.
      1. Newone 5 March 2020 17: 24 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Since the composition of Nakhimov’s modernization is unknown to me, I cannot speak objectively.
        Here, from personal experience, when they try to reduce the cost of a complex complex, as a rule, the characteristics sink significantly, but the price also does not drop significantly.
        New documentation will again be needed for new modernization, new production preparation, and accordingly, new problems will have to be addressed.
      2. Nemchinov Vl 8 March 2020 02: 34 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: timokhin-aa
        It is better to simply throw out the Granites and replace them with UKKS, the rest will be upgraded to a minimum, without rebuilding and repair.
        But do not you think, uv. Alexander that - "just throw out Granites and replace with UKKS,"(and mean cable route), plus the repair of a power plant, it’s practically the same as at Nakhimov’s, at a price ?! No ?!
  • AAK
    AAK 5 March 2020 01: 26 New
    • 2
    • 2
    0
    I believe that the "Eagles" as shock ships against the surface forces of the enemy fleet are of very little use, even taking into account the replacement of the "Granite" with any other complex. None of the large fleet’s connections, even at 1000 km (the maximum published firing range of the relatively fast Zircon), will not let ... Shooting at Caliber ships is pointless even at the maximum range ... Mass launch (and there’s no reason to shoot alone) from outer space, during the approaching time, enemy ships can retreat 50-100km, and you should not forget about KUG air defense, “for him the Caliber is not the most dangerous target ... Its version of the Chinese anti-ship Dunfeng flying (according to the Chinese ) for 2-2,5tys.km and we don’t have 20-30 minutes and we’ll get into an aircraft carrier ... We’ll simply not be able to approach the US coast at the same 1000-2000 km in the Atlantic, in the Pacific ... The only acceptable use of the Orlan - this is air defense / missile defense missile system, but it does not yet have a "marine" version of the S-500 and is not provided for by the UVP project for enemy land / sea ballistic missile interceptors or for compact carriers for launching their small-sized military satellites into low orbits ... Without ships Orlan escorts will become relatively easy prey boats, and even repelling the launch of anti-ship missiles / missile launchers even from one squadron from an aircraft carrier will be very problematic ... Therefore, very little is believed in the terror of the Americans “from breaking into the world’s ocean” even of both “Orlanes” at the same time ... Really, it would be better for the money spent on the repair of our Tirpitsa to build a pair of nuclear submarines or Gorshkovyh, or 5-6 corvettes, more benefit to the fleet ...
    1. Newone 5 March 2020 02: 00 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      "Eagles" as strike ships against the surface forces of the enemy fleet are of very little use

      You are not right:
      Scenario 1. During the threatened period, Orlan enters the Tromsø Bear Spitsbergen patrol area in the Barents Sea. Accordingly, not a single large surface ship of the enemy will go into this line, which means a sharp decrease in the density of volleys of tomahawks at objects on our territory (at least the arly berks will not attack). At the same time, Orlan Zircons cover ALL Norway infrastructure at least. And the enemy practically can not counteract this (Zircons cannot be intercepted at the moment). And in Norway, for example, the North Radar of the US global missile defense stands. Such a quantity of weapons as on Orlan on corvettes cannot be provided. As well as not providing the same opportunity to use these weapons in difficult weather conditions.
      Scenario: Accompanying the AUG in a threatened period. Even with an attack on Orlan, he is likely to have time to destroy at least an aircraft carrier
      1. Alexey RA 5 March 2020 13: 52 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: Newone
        Scenario 1. During the threatened period, Orlan enters the Tromsø Bear Spitsbergen patrol area in the Barents Sea.

        Further 250-300 miles from the base is better not to depart. Otherwise, coastal fighters simply will not have time to strengthen the duty link / squadron over our KUG - and these duty forces will simply be demolished. And then the adversary will work out with anti-ship missiles due to the radio horizon.
        Quote: Newone
        Scenario: Accompanying the AUG in a threatened period.

        One of the twelve? wink
        1. timokhin-aa 5 March 2020 14: 18 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          The answer is in the abbreviation OPESK or the deployment of forces of the DMZ in a threatened period, before the outbreak of hostilities.

          Plus, you still need to remember that we are more likely to attack someone. And here it will be important to stupidly the number of missiles.
          1. Alexey RA 5 March 2020 17: 08 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            Quote: timokhin-aa
            The answer is in the abbreviation OPESK or the deployment of forces of the DMZ in a threatened period, before the outbreak of hostilities.

            Then what does the "Eagles" have to do with it? By the time we can form a full-fledged OPESK, or at least build the required number of DMZ ships, the Orlans will already be written off by age.
            1. Newone 5 March 2020 17: 28 New
              • 1
              • 2
              -1
              Orlan, in general, does not particularly need other ships. He is a warrior alone in the sea.
              1. Alexey RA 6 March 2020 12: 43 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Quote: Newone
                Orlan, in general, does not particularly need other ships. He is a warrior alone in the sea.

                Yeah ... especially at low altitudes, where the range of the "Fort" is reduced to 35-40 km. That is, the adversary can work on TARKR "harpoons" with PMV without any threat to the carriers.
                And yes, do not forget that the “Fort” with its two APs can operate in a sector of a maximum of 180 degrees. The remaining half of the horizon remains covered only by short-range air defense systems and self-defense air defense systems - by “daggers” and “daggers”.
                1. Newone 8 March 2020 22: 06 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  Fort range decreases

                  Yeah. with a Ka-31 AWACS helicopter above the mast.
                  do not forget that the “Fort” with its two AP
                  This is probably why Peter the Great already has 2 forts. With the modernized Nakhimov- it can be assumed that no worse. And certainly better than 22350.
                  And, as the experience of Syria has shown, the tomahawks bring down the Shells and Torahs, i.e. analogues of daggers and shells. Fort - to destroy carriers.
            2. timokhin-aa 6 March 2020 09: 25 New
              • 2
              • 0
              +2
              Yes, it’s corny 2 cruisers and 2-3 SSGNs that were previously brought to the Atlantic - and this will frustrate the offensive operation against us in the North, at least for sure.

              Plus they are atomic and they have the opportunity to get away from the chase.

              Plus, just a large carrier of the Kyrgyz Republic, which can be without supply for a long time in a given area, and this is useful for local wars.
              1. Newone 8 March 2020 22: 54 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                In addition to Timokhin, we can say that Orlan is the most powerful means of continuous illumination of surface and air conditions at sea. In the area of ​​its operation, for example, the enemy will be extremely inconvenient to launch ballistic missiles. Just in the radius of action of lighting the surface situation (450 km) after launching the enemy’s first three tridents, for example, zircon with a special warhead will fly in and infuse the submarine. And in the radius of the Fort (250km), the first missiles can also be shot down.
                This, in turn, sharply pushes the boundaries of the first strike from our territory. The concentration of forces and means to attack Orlan in the prewar period allows a preemptive strike.
        2. Newone 5 March 2020 17: 04 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Sorry, but you're wrong again.
          In the area of ​​operation of its aviation-radar patrol + just a patrol, it is extremely difficult to search for and escort Orlan with enemy aircraft. Before you go on an offensive, you need to at least know where to fly.
          The destruction of even one Aug will fully pay off the costs of Orlan.
          And if you really want to sink something larger, you can, for example, go to Kings Bay within a radius of 100 km either to guam or Norfolk.
      2. Firelake 5 March 2020 14: 09 New
        • 0
        • 1
        -1
        He will not be able to survive the mass raid of enemy aircraft. 20 sides will turn it into bubbles, and lose 10 aircraft and drown such a ship ... good exchange.
        1. Newone 5 March 2020 17: 26 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          20 sides 40 pc. Do you really think that 40 subsonic PCRs are guaranteed to destroy the modernized Orlan?
          1. Firelake 5 March 2020 23: 52 New
            • 1
            • 1
            0
            Jassm 5 pieces will already turn the ship. in the trough and this is 1/8 volley. Then think for yourself. Sincerely.
            1. Newone 5 March 2020 23: 53 New
              • 0
              • 1
              -1
              Well, "Henry Ford" is possible. Orlan has air defense and reb.
              1. Firelake 5 March 2020 23: 56 New
                • 1
                • 1
                0
                Adept off Aegis Khibiny approx. Accepted.
                Henry Ford will not be alone. And the eagle will be alone. Do you see the difference?
                1. Newone 6 March 2020 00: 01 New
                  • 0
                  • 1
                  -1
                  Adept "Rushka ffseee"
                  The presence of an escort from an aircraft carrier does not affect the ability of Orlan to repel an attack of 40 subsonic anti-ship missiles.
      3. Nemchinov Vl 8 March 2020 02: 26 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: Newone
        At the same time, Orlan Zircons cover ALL Norway infrastructure at least. And the opponent can’t practically counteract this(Zircons cannot be intercepted at the moment).
        Try to intercept, then what else is not !!! Here you are right, I support !!! Do not revel in optimism !!
        Quote: Newone
        Such an amount of weapons as in Orlan on corvettes cannot be provided.
        This is undeniable. But you didn’t take into account that you were counting on Orlan, as already in service (like a living !!!), but meanwhile, we still cannot wait for the end of the modernization of Nakhimov, at a price clearly for 100 billion. (and years to modernize) !!!
        Quote: Newone
        Scenario: Accompanying the AUG in a threatened period ...
        Yes, I am for, but we do not even have anything to form them from ?! And if sharply (this and next year) do not invest into mass construction 22350.1 (as the only one worked out for now, and increasing control for spending money, and the construction period !!!), then after 4-5 years, when like "Chabanenko", / freeze for repair / another five heels of BOD 1155, all three (SF, Pacific Fleet, and Black Sea Fleet) and one KPUG of ships cannot be collected ?!
        1. Newone 8 March 2020 22: 37 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Try to intercept, which is not yet

          We are talking about modernization, which will last from 5 years. Zircons in trials now. And they successfully pass these tests.
          But you did not take into account that you were counting on Orlan, as already in service (as if alive !!!)

          I do not count on Orlan "as in the ranks" I count on what we can get in 5 years for a period of 25+ years.
          22350 we will NOT get any more under construction: there are no used engines or gearboxes and how much it is still to restore, no one knows.
          Eagles, as a platform already exist.
          The modernization potential of the cruiser is an order of magnitude higher than the frigate. A laser system for reflecting hypersonic blocks, for example, after 10 years you will not cram into a frigate — there is no power for it. In Orlan, instead of guns, you will cram. All the same, you need to think not only about today, but also about what may happen tomorrow.
          1. Nemchinov Vl 9 March 2020 00: 49 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Quote: Newone
            I look forward to what we can get in 5 years
            the maximum of "Nakhimov", and
            Quote: Newone
            for a period of 25+ years.
            here it seems, you are bent?!.
            Quote: Newone
            22350 we will not receive more under construction
            why ?!
            Quote: Newone
            there are no used engines or gearboxes
            everything is. There is no clear understanding of what is enough to play. We need state will (requirement), clear and rhythmic financing, and control over its spending (this is the first) !!!
            Quote: Newone
            and how much is still to restore, no one knows.
            it’s just besides “Saturn” and “Zveda-Reductor”, it’s time to create another enterprise for a long time (see room above. this is the second) ... Then the construction dates of fr.22350.1 will rhythmically reach the level of 3,5 - 5 years (as it should be, not 12). No more !!.
            Quote: Newone
            The modernization potential of the cruiser is an order of magnitude higher than the frigate.
            yes, but the timing of this modernization ... From 7 to 12 years ... And its cost ?!
            Quote: Newone
            Laser installation for reflection of hypersonic blocks, for example, in 10 years you’re not pushing into the frigate, there is no power for it. In Orlan, instead of guns, you will cram. All the same, you need to think not only about today, but also about what may happen tomorrow.
            Then it’s better for conservation now ... Otherwise, you already have the second modernization (after the first modernization under UKKSK and GEM), under
            Quote: Newone
            Laser installation for reflection of hypersonic blocks,
            where and which - not yet; Yes and which - not yet, the probable opponent .... Otherwise, - for what, pay twice ?!
            Quote: Newone
            All the same, you need to think not only about today, but also about what may happen tomorrow.
            I agree !! For example, tomorrow - after tomorrow (3-5 years), like Chabanenko, they will freeze at the piers, without a power plant (with a developed power plant) five out of the seven remaining BODs, and ...?! Yes, maybe Nakhimov will be back, but freezes on upgrades "Peter", eating the cost of 2-3 frigates ..?! and maybe "Varangian" ...?!
            Quote: Newone
            Zircons in trials now. And they successfully pass these tests.
            I hope so, (true). I really hope for it.
            1. Newone 9 March 2020 20: 22 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              maximum "Nakhimov"

              The maximum of Nakhimov and Peter. If rhythmically finance (C).
              everything is.

              No. One propulsion system per year. Production is scheduled for already laid ships.
              it’s just besides Saturn and Zveda-Reductor, it’s time to create another company for a long time

              You can’t create a new enterprise simply by pouring loot. So it does NOT work out.
              yes, but the timing of this modernization ... From 7 to 12 years ... And its cost ?!

              7-12 years of modernization after 20 years of destruction upon the ship (without normal scheduled repairs, maintenance and not a very professional team). On Peter the terms will be less — the ship was not abandoned.
              For example, tomorrow - after tomorrow (3-5 years),

              If you DO NOT upgrade Petra, everything will be the same only instead of 2 cruisers corresponding to the level of threats, there will be 1 (Nakhimov) and one NOT appropriate and practically unarmed (Granites by that time will exhaust their resources).
              Additionally, but more importantly, we will lose PEOPLE ABLE TO ATTEMPT TO REPAIR cruising class ships. And this proser can no longer be compensated.
  • Pavel57 5 March 2020 16: 46 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Maybe it is worth upgrading GRANITE?
  • Maxwrx 5 March 2020 18: 06 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    Nakhimov, launch in 86g, modernization began in 2014, will end at 22. Total 8 years. Peter, launching 88g, modernization in 22g, well, let them drive away in 6 years. Total will finish in 28g. By that time, the ship will be 40 years old. Well, how long will he last? 15 years maximum. Build 100bn for 15 years of service. Well, so-so economy turns out. The ship is certainly large, powerful, prestigious. But it is better to make ships of the coastal zone of new projects, we have huge holes there.
    1. Newone 5 March 2020 21: 57 New
      • 2
      • 2
      0
      Iowa has served for over 50 years. They wrote off only because of the high cost of maintenance — the units of the power plant were so ancient that for repairs it was necessary to completely re-establish the release of a broken part every time.
      Upgraded "to the fullest" Orlan is actually a new ship. He will serve another 50 years.
  • bk0010 5 March 2020 20: 23 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    I believe that Peter should be modernized in full, with all the money. There is money in the country (not for everyone, but there is), but there are not enough shipbuilding capacities and ships. Until we restore the possibility of building ships of the first rank, we must modernize the old ships (for now, at least we can). The talk that instead of modernizing the Eagles can be built three frigates (exactly three?) Resembles the talk of taking a Gazelle instead of Kamaz, then it turns out that not everything gets into Gazelle. These ships can be flagships (there is not enough space for this on the frigate), they can run off somewhere to the coast of Africa if they offend us there, and support the efforts of our diplomats, even if our ships refuse to refuel (like Kuzyu), they can serve as the basis for OPESK and etc.
  • tigoda 6 March 2020 00: 02 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Two cruisers of the project 1144 are not something to repair, they are just too damn expensive to maintain. And we need new, modern ships that will last 40 years, and not 10 years after repair. No new money, the money goes to the maintenance of these cruisers. 1 such a cruiser without an escort fleet from a military point of view is void. It is better to have a flotilla of 3-5 frigates; this is not a big, but real force. Moreover, such a flotilla will be much less devastating for the country.
    1. Newone 6 March 2020 01: 01 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Excuse me, what kind of escort fleet does Orlan need?
    2. Maxwrx 6 March 2020 08: 38 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      It is doubtful that it is less ruinous, but more accurately for sure
  • Demagogue 6 March 2020 16: 46 New
    • 0
    • 1
    -1
    Quote: timokhin-aa
    Yes, it’s corny 2 cruisers and 2-3 SSGNs that were previously brought to the Atlantic - and this will frustrate the offensive operation against us in the North, at least for sure.

    Plus they are atomic and they have the opportunity to get away from the chase.

    Plus, just a large carrier of the Kyrgyz Republic, which can be without supply for a long time in a given area, and this is useful for local wars.


    Is this how they get away from the chase? Overtaking enemy aircraft?
  • Diverter 7 March 2020 11: 42 New
    • 0
    • 1
    -1
    Initial data:
    1. These boats were built by a superstrana for another war. Roughly speaking, for mixing half the world with another half the world. The third world war (it’s good that it was economic and political and didn’t get to a real batch), the first half of the world lost and now it is gone. This means that such boats are not needed because there will be no such war. This is a given.
    But the boats remained.

    2. The world has changed, and minor wars - conflicts have remained. They can be everywhere as always. We also need to be there, because it is sometimes very important and necessary. Again, the flag should be shown so as not to be forgotten.
    Remember that the boats still remain.

    3. The Russian fleet is practically locked off its coast, except for the Pacific Fleet. Take the globe and see for yourself. So, you need a lot of not very large ships, which together with coast-based aviation will destroy enemy submarine and surface forces on the way to our shores. This is if they trample on us, which is unlikely. It dawned on everyone that the big war was nuclear weapons, and with him the furry animal would visit everyone without exception. But you still can’t relax the rolls.
    We had boats somewhere.

    4. To date, the Russian Federation has a very small surface fleet. There are very few modern boats. Basically, they are all weak. Therefore, they need a lot. A lot of patrolmen, A lot with PRK, A lot with PLO, A lot with KR (neighbors and not only to keep in good shape)
    It seems there were boats, we remember.

    5. Finally, it dawned on someone that we have cool boats. True, they are very old. So we will repair and upgrade them. And then wow, as we show them! Do we need it ?!
    Kaneshn !!! We look at paragraph 2! But the option is not bad. But expensive. Cool show off, oh boat! more expensive dough!

    Conclusion:
    1. We need a supply point on the Horn of Africa. As negotiations we end (are in full swing) we will put a boat in the Indian Ocean. And to help him multipurpose nuclear submarines and a couple of ships of the BOD type.
    2. We also need a supply point in Vietnam and Nicaragua / Cuba / Venezuela. While they do not want, but we are working on it. As they agree, we are the second such ship with a nuclear submarine and a pair of three other BODs in the Atlantic and / or the Pacific.
    3. Yes! Not the AUG is kaneshno, but if there’s a batch where, then the boat is here! Nearby! Big and formidable! And a pendell can give a specific one. Flags a flag in front of the aggressor’s nose! Protect comrade (of course lime, but right this minute).
    4. So we do the repair, because there are no other large ones.
    We cannot build new ones yet!
    We do not regret the money, because it happens that they did not help right away and then it will cost much more.
    Politics, you understand, are closely connected with the economy.

    Dear strategists and expers. Learn to think globally (strategically) and broadly and in the long term.
    And also take care of nature! Your mother! Otherwise there will be nowhere to partisan!)))))))))))))))))))))))
    1. Cyrus 7 March 2020 12: 37 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Well, about the big war, you turned down, given it is not possible, it is a given only for you and it does not coincide with the ideas of other people, and most importantly those who have the power to unleash it.
      For the rest, I agree, the Eagles will be needed in any case.
      1. Diverter 8 March 2020 15: 48 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Mostly Anglo-Saxons can unleash it, but they are cowardly and understand that the furry animal will come running. The situation with North Korea and Iran is proof of this.
    2. Nemchinov Vl 8 March 2020 02: 12 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: Saboteur
      These boats were built by a superstrana for another war.
      This statement is indisputable, i.e., almost an axiom !!!.
      Quote: Saboteur
      The Russian fleet is practically locked off its coast, except for the Pacific Fleet.
      Pacific Fleet in its current quantity, not an exception (there it is most obvious that quantity - matters). !!
      Quote: Saboteur
      So you need a lot of not very large ships
      In my opinion it is logical, but they are not there ?! And here, probably the key one, not dimensions, but let’s put it this way, specific power (thrust-weight ratio / versatility, if you will, of each unit of the fleet’s combat strength) ... But from our / today / Project 22350.1 (of the type "Amelko"), closest to that (in terms of capabilities strike weapons / anti-submarine capabilities). Something like this.
      Quote: Saboteur
      We had boats somewhere.
      The trouble is that they are almost gone (I’m talking about the motor resources of BPK 1155, which urgently need to be replenished at least 22350.1 / at first /, but they are in no hurry to do this ?! There’s a problem !!!
      Quote: Saboteur
      Today, the Russian Federation has a very small surface fleet. There are very few modern boats. Basically, they are all weak. Therefore, they need a lot.
      just about it just now.
      Quote: Saboteur
      Conclusion:
      We need a supply point on the horn of Africa
      theoretically yes, but now ?! Despite the fact that there is no NK 1 rank, in sufficient quantity ?! And not only for the formation of the OPESK?!, But even for one normal KPUG (at least at the Black Sea Fleet, at least at the Pacific Fleet) ?! In the Northern Fleet, having collected all rank 1 BNKs "on the go", at most one normal KPUG will work out ?! those. Is it right now to talk about PMTO for the fleet ?!
      Quote: Saboteur
      And to help him a multi-purpose submarine
      Yes, and they are not enough in the ranks ...
      Quote: Saboteur
      and a couple of ships like BOD.
      soon everyone will die like "Chabanenko" ...
      Quote: Saboteur
      We also need a supply point in Vietnam and Nicaragua / Cuba / Venezuela.
      In perspective, “Yes !!”, I certainly agree, but now ?! In the absence of a sufficient number of warships of the 1st rank and ICAPL ?!
      Quote: Saboteur
      So we do the repair, because there are no other large ones.
      No !!! If the price of repair 100 billion and above (i.e. 3 frigates and more !!), then no !! Repair, this one will drag on for at least 7 years !!! This will undermine the fleet and “multiply by zero” completely. If 100 billion or more, it’s better to invest these funds urgently in three frigates (and maximize control over their intended use, like under Beria !!) and during the calendar year. This will prevent the inevitable failure that "coming with the wear of the GTD BPK resource"in 3-5 years !!!
      1. Diverter 8 March 2020 15: 52 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        It is necessary to agree on the creation of a PMTO now. While we’ll agree, while we’ll make the bamazhes, while we’ll build, we’ll recruit trained staff ....... There the ships will appear.
  • xomaNN 7 March 2020 13: 56 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Judging by the pictures, the repair is NOT cosmetic. In an adult, they have spoiled. When I was a builder of the PKK at the overhaul of the BPC "Kronstadt" from the inside, I know what repairs are and what cable routes are in an armored braid. Everywhere and hundreds. hi
  • Procyon lotor 2 May 2020 22: 14 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Little inaccuracy. The most powerful ship’s gun mount in the world today is 155mm - the Advanced gun system, which is mounted on the Zamvolt type destroyer. There are only three of them, so we can say that even the Americans realized that the powerful naval artillery in its traditional form was a relic.
  • Fishery 17 May 2020 18: 13 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    )) but the meaning will be like with Yamato, he alone will not do anything
  • Petrol cutter 22 May 2020 22: 00 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    What does it mean there is a certain risk!
    A certain steamer will not get something there ...
    Any ship will not receive what was not provided for in the design. This is the axiom of shipbuilding.
    There are some options for placement / that is, modernization. But, if such an opportunity was originally laid in the ship.
    Far, not every ship has such an opportunity ...
    Therefore, statements, there is a certain risk ..
    Immediately, no ...