Upgraded "Marshal Shaposhnikov" will receive a new gun mount A-190-01

Undergoing repair and modernization, the former large anti-submarine ship, retrained to the frigate "Marshal Shaposhnikov", is changing its artillery. Instead of two bow 100-mm AK-100 guns, the ship will receive a 100-mm gun mount A-190-01. This was reported by Izvestia with reference to the Ministry of Defense.

The modified A-190-01 installation passed all the tests and was put into service eight years ago. It has a rate of fire of up to 80 rounds per minute with a maximum range of over 20 km. It can also shoot down aircraft at an altitude of up to 15 km. At the same time, the tower of the installation is made using stealth technology, which reduces the likelihood of the frigate "glow" on radars. The two A-100 gun mounts previously installed on the ship were developed back in the 70s of the last century and were clearly visible on enemy radars.

Earlier it was reported that the large anti-submarine ships of project 1155 will become frigates, the decision on this has already been made in the Ministry of Defense. In the first summer of 2019, the Marshal Shaposhnikov BOD was officially retrained, undergoing modernization at Dalzavod in Vladivostok. The remaining ships of this project will be retrained after undergoing modernization. According to the source, the modernized ships will combine the capabilities of carriers of high-precision cruise missiles and anti-submarine ships.

During the modernization, the Marshal Shaposhnikov has already installed the Uran anti-ship complex with X-35 missiles, the universal caliber, Onyx or Zircon cruise missile launcher, the Bagira fire control system for naval artillery, the ship electronic suppression complex TK-25.

After replacing two A-100 gun mounts with one A-190-1, the fate of the armament that stood on the BOD before modernization remained unknown: two 45-mm semi-automatic guns 21-KM, four 30-mm ZAK AK-630, two SAM "Dagger", two anti-submarine complexes "Rastrub-B", two reactive-bomb installations RBU-6000, as well as torpedo tubes. On board the BOD are two Ka-27PL helicopters.

The total displacement of the ships of the 1155 project is 7570 tons, the hull length is 163,5 meters. Speed ​​- up to 32 nodes, cruising range - 5 thousand miles on 18 nodes, autonomy - 30 days. Crew - 220 people (including 29 officers).

Comments

[Victor_B]

In some news I read that it was not installed STELS tower!
That is, the enemy, without detecting the AU, will safely shout to the buffet!

[Aerodrome]

Quote: Victor_B

In some news I read that it was not installed STELS tower!
That is, the enemy, without detecting the AU, will safely shout to the buffet!

of course utter nonsense with "stealth", what is the use of a gun turret, if the architecture of the ship itself is completely different.

[Grigory_45]

Quote: Victor_B

Only a dumb journalist can write in the news feed

alas, but these are just the sea. All news feeds are full of headlines in the style "Russian" Marshal Shaposhnikov "will receive a stealth gun"

[Aristarkh Lyudvigovich]

Quote: Gregory_45

All news feeds are full of headlines in the style "Russian" Marshal Shaposhnikov "will receive a stealth gun"

The main gun is not only stealth, I am also light. The body of protection for the A190-01 naval artillery mount is made of plastic composite materials, which resulted in a reduction in the mass of the product with high strength and resistance to the transfer of shock loads during firing.

[TermNachTer]

What about PU? Will the "marshal" be equipped with a UVP or will the old ones remain?

[bayard]

Gazelle brought the whole tower ... however.
And when will Shaposhnikov be expected in the ranks, Aristarkh? In this, as I understand it, we can't wait for a year?
And where are they going to upgrade everyone else? If only in the Vladivostok SRZ, then everyone will definitely not be in time. And it would be necessary.

[alexmach]

According to the plans this year ...

[bayard]

Then for the Pacific Fleet it will be a real holiday!

[musorg]

Get a stealth gun, which one there this year. For how many years I have heard surrender, now they are silent.

[alexmach]

Get a stealth gun

1. the gun is a trifle.
2. not a fact that they have not yet received and have not installed, but even if it still lies there next to the cranes, then installing it is not such a big deal compared to the full amount of work being done.

[Aristarkh Lyudvigovich]

Quote: bayard

And when to wait in the ranks "Shaposhnikov"

This year they planned. This is the starting deadline, then the rates begin to rise!

[Grits]

Quote: Aristarkh Ludwigovich

The main gun is not only stealth, I'm also light.

The main thing here, of course, is not stealth. And the fact that this tower with a gun was developed as universal for many projects. Including having an architecture of stealth. And since there was no point in installing an old cannon with a tower, they just stuck a new, improved one.

[Hagalaz]

Well, here most likely the claims need to be presented to the writer of the article. And the author, in general, does not position the technology of the stealth tower as the reason for the replacement on this ship. And the reason for the replacement may be, for example, the wear of old trunks, some kind of mechanisms, the modernization of systems. And in this case, it is more rational to replace the entire tower with the one that the plant produces when the old one is out of production. Do not resume.

[Grigory_45]

Quote: Hagalaz

And the author, in general, does not exactly position the stealth tower technology as the reason for the replacement, on this ship

all the same, it is not very clear why the AU was installed with a turret in the stealth form factor, although the plant can also produce an AU with a "classic" turret for our Navy

in particular, they were installed on frigates pr.11356

[Ratmir_Ryazan]

in particular, they were installed on frigates pr.11356

On frigates A-190 with a tower made taking into account stealth -

[Grigory_45]

Quote: Ratmir_Ryazan

On frigates A-190 with a tower made taking into account stealth -

gun mount of the frigate pr.11356 Trishul of the Indian Navy:

artillery mount of the frigate pr.11356R "Admiral Grigorovich" of the Russian Navy

[Ratmir_Ryazan]

See the bookmark date for frigates for India and Russia.

They used to build a tower for India and therefore put up a tower which the plant could then release, a new tower was made in parallel and now they are only setting up a new type on all ships, both new and modernized.

And this is correct, since it is simpler, more logical and cheaper.

What is the point of keeping equipment at the factory and making old-style towers ?! Versatility is the way to save.

[venik]

Quote: Gregory_45

all the same, it is not very clear why the AU was installed with a turret in the stealth form factor, although the plant can also produce an AU with a "classic" turret for our Navy

=======
But do not you know?
Then I will try to explain:
At first: The plant can no longer produce towers of "classic", as you put it, forms, since it has switched to the SERIAL production of new towers (which means that the equipment has changed, some machines, etc. - in short, changing the WHOLE technological cycle!
Second: And the SENSE in this (tower production using old technology) WHAT ??? Swell a bunch of dough in recovery old technology ..... For "beauty" or what ???
Third: AK-190-01 more than double cheaper and more than double easierthan the old AK-100 (15 tons versus 35 tons!) ...
-----

Quote: Gregory_45

in particular, they were installed on frigates pr.11356

=======
Yah! What are you talking about! Not pr. 11356 old towers were placed only on frigates for the Indian Navy, laid before 2012!
By the way, AK-190s are installed on ours (and in the "stealth" version:

Here is the "Admiral Grigorovich" at the outfitting wall of the PSZ "Yantar", 18.06.2014/XNUMX/XNUMX

[Grigory_45]

Quote: venik

Third: the AK-190-01 is more than half the price and more than half the size of the old AK-100 (15 tons versus 35 tons!)

thank you, but I know this, and it was not about the mass

Quote: venik

Yah! What are you talking about!

I say so. Project 11356 - for the Indian Navy, for the Russian Navy - Project 11356R.

Quote: venik

By the way, AK-190s are installed on ours (and in the "stealth" version

and I know this very well (re-read the comments)

Quote: venik

First: The plant can no longer produce towers of "classic" as you put it.

you say this as a person in the subject, or is it your assumptions?

Quote: venik

in short, I changed the ENTIRE technological cycle!

no, not all. Only in that part which concerns a tower casing. Apart from the hinges of several additional systems, the insides of the tower remained the same

[venik]

Quote: Gregory_45

First: The plant can no longer produce towers of "classic" as you put it.
you say this as a person in the subject, or is it your assumptions?

=======
Enough "in the subject". Not specifically with regard to the A-190. It's just that I often had to visit machine-building factories for work, therefore I well know WHAT COSTS are required, for example, to switch to another (even if slightly modified) body shape of a passenger car. How much money, resources, labor costs it requires, how does it affect the pace of production. Even a small change in the design of a refrigerator or washing machine is still a "headache" !!!
AND FOR WHAT DOES IT NEED? To make the artillery tower "more aesthetic" (from your point of view)? Is the "question price" too high ???

[Grigory_45]

Quote: venik

Not specifically regarding the A-190.

means not in the subject. Specifically for the A-190 you can’t explain, and you only have assumptions.

Quote: venik

Just for work, I often had to visit machine-building plants

I myself worked for 11 years in the defense design bureau, and I know perfectly what engineering is. As well as the fact that snap does not have to be destroyed.
In addition, shipboard ACs are not a conveyor assembly. There is no need for a conveyor, piece products.

[Piramidon]

Quote: venik

AND FOR WHAT DOES IT NEED? To make the artillery tower "more aesthetic" (from your point of view)?

Well, at least for the sake of weight loss. And all these "stealth" for the ode to the tower the author used for the "catchphrase". Maybe he likes the word "stealth".

[Grigory_45]

Quote: Hagalaz

And the reason for the replacement may be for example

for example, the AK-100 is no longer manufactured. Like spare parts for them.

[Hagalaz]

I agree, the issue is not sufficiently covered. I think, and the author has no information about the reasons for making a decision in this particular case.

[venik]

Quote: Aerodrome

stupidity of course utter with "stealth", what is the use of a gun turret if the architecture of the ship itself is completely different.

========
I agree! Here the authors, of course, "too clever", more precisely demonstrated complete incompetence! .... Here, of course, the "trick" is not in the "stealth" tower (with lattice masts and vertical metal superstructures - this is nonsense!) - just AK-190-01 more perfect system compared to AK-100. It's just that it was initially mass-produced using "stealth" technologies. In this form and set.
Raise questions and other "pearls" - such as:
"....In the course of modernization, Marshal Shaposhnikov has already installed the Uran anti-ship complex with Kh-35 missiles, a universal launcher for Kalibr, Onyx or Zircon cruise missiles..... "
Immediately a question: If they put UKSK "Caliber" there, then why the hell is there also "Uranus" ????

[alexmach]

Immediately a question: If they put UKSK "Caliber" there, then why the hell is there also "Uranus" ????

And why not put it for small purposes. The sit is here. Still, it would not hurt to have a very small missile system for equipping ships to fight all sorts of Shahid boats and other non-independent armored boats. It would be useful for small ships at least.

By the way, the author is not at all to blame here, this is not the first message about such a combination of USKK + "Uran" missile weapons.

[venik]

Quote: alexmach

this is far from the first message about such a combination of USKK + "Uran" missile weapons.

=====
I doubt however ..... Although, what the hell is not joking? They can also vmantulit instead of "Trumpet" .... Then instead of the second tower it will be possible to squeeze in not 1x8 but 2x8 UKSK! By weight it just comes out (without misalignment), but by size - I think it will fit! Then a very weak boat will turn out ...
Well, about "fighting off the jackals" - so for this there are both AK-190 and AK-630, and the "Dagger", as far as I know, can work for small surface targets ...

[Aristarkh Lyudvigovich]

Quote: venik

Then instead of the second tower it will be possible to squeeze not 1x8 but 2x8 UKKS!

Vladimir "Marshal Shaposhnikov" will have 2x8 UKKS. AU A-190 stands under the crane. The number of missiles is increased by 2 times, the firing range at surface targets is increased by 3 times, it becomes possible to fire at ground targets from a long distance (which was not the case before). Since the ship still has the Kinzhal air defense system with a range of 12 km, it does not pull on the URO destroyer. After the upgrade, there will be 16 Calibers and 8 Uraniums.

[venik]

Thanks! Very interesting information! True, I didn’t quite see under which particular crane the A-190 stands - under the average?
--------

Quote: Aristarkh Ludwigovich

As the dagger with a range of 12 km remains on the ship, it does not pull the URO destroyer.

=======
Here it’s not entirely clear to me. Is the class of a ship determined by type anti-aircraft missiles ??? If SAM "self-defense" - then the destroyer "does not pull", and if "zonal" - then already "pulls"? Where, then, pr. 20385 with its "Redoubt" - can you "write" into the destroyers URO or what ??? By the way, there is also "Caliber" ...
I generally thought that the rank of the ship is determined mainly by displacement, seaworthiness, autonomy and range ....
Maybe wrong of course ??

[Grigory_45]

Quote: venik

I generally thought that the rank of the ship is determined mainly by displacement, seaworthiness, autonomy and range

rank is determined by the totality

[Aristarkh Lyudvigovich]

Quote: venik

True, I didn’t quite see under which particular crane the A-190 stands - under the average?

Yes, there, behind the A-100, a new faceted A-190 tower is visible.

Quote: venik

Is the class of the ship determined by the type of anti-aircraft missiles ??? If SAM "self-defense" - then the destroyer "does not pull", and if "zonal" - then already "pulls"? Where, then, pr. 20385 with its "Redoubt" - can you "write" into the destroyers URO or what ??? By the way, there is also "Caliber" ...
I generally thought that the rank of the ship is determined mainly by displacement, seaworthiness, autonomy and range ....

1155, after modernization, will still retain anti-submarine specialization, but will also receive a strike potential that was not there before. But he will not become a destroyer. In general, it even turns out to be somehow ridiculous: they assign a corvette to the "destroyer" 1155mod and it almost surpasses this "destroyer" in air defense capabilities.

[venik]

Quote: Aristarkh Ludwigovich

Yes, there, behind the A-100, a new faceted A-190 tower is visible.

=====
Yeah, I saw! It’s a pity it’s a little bad, but thanks for that too!
-----

Quote: Aristarkh Ludwigovich

But he will not become a destroyer.

=====
Well, I don't quite agree. Take the British Daring (Type 45). In the same place, apart from anti-aircraft weapons (48 missiles "Aster" and 2 "Volcanoes") and even 114-mm cannon, there is really nothing else !!! Neither strike nor anti-submarine weapons .... Anti-torpedo - fired noise jammers and jammers.
And yet it is listed as a "destroyer", albeit with a caveat - the Brits themselves call it an "air defense destroyer" ....
And the question is: Why not call 1155mod "PLO destroyer"??? The anti-submarine weapons are powerful there (unless, of course, the TA and RBU are removed). The latter, by the way, showed themselves well and as an anti-torpedo weapon ...
-------

Quote: Aristarkh Ludwigovich

In general, it even turns out somehow ridiculous: they assign a corvette to the "destroyer" 1155mod and it almost surpasses this "destroyer" in its air defense capabilities.

=======
Well, I’m talking about that !!

[Grigory_45]

Quote: venik

Take the British Daring (Type 45). In the same place, apart from anti-aircraft weapons (48 missiles "Aster" and 2 "Volcanoes") and even 114-mm cannon, there is really nothing else !!! Neither strike nor anti-submarine weapons

here you are cool wrong.
Let's start with PLO. Yes, Daring itself does not have anti-submarine strike weapons, but it has a powerful ASG, as well as an anti-submarine helicopter. It is helicopters that will take on the function of destroying submarines (torpedoes or depth charges), along with KUG corvettes. The helicopter in this regard is more effective than a surface ship.

As for strike weapons. In the current configuration, Daring does not carry it, but - there are reserved places for the installation of a 2x4 Harpoon launcher, as well as UVP Mk41 (12 cells). And to establish them is a matter of several days. And download at least the latest anti-ship missiles such as SCALP Naval or LRASM, at least Axes. Total - 20 anti-ship and cruise missiles.

Of course, he cannot be compared with Burke in the shock plan, but the British put emphasis on air defense / missile defense. And in this hypostasis, Daring is effortlessly able to plug even the vaunted Burke with Aegis into his belt. Not to mention domestic BODs not of the first freshness (which, apart from short-range air defense systems and a pair of automatic rifles, alas, have nothing)

[Dante Alighieri]

then he doesn’t pull on the destroyer URO

Aristarchus, I salute you! That's the problem, that even after such a large-scale (and apparently far from cheap) modernization for a middle-aged ship, Shaposhnikov still will not be able to take on all the functionality of his 956 destroyer partners that have sunk into oblivion, on which even today, a very tolerable air defense in the face of the Shtil air defense system (at least Chinese 054A frigates and Russian-Indian 11356 frigates are still equipped with it only not in the beam version, but in the form of cells). But this moment could also be solved if there were inclined UKKS ZS-14, which would easily take the place of the Bell, while the space vacated after the dismantling of the second weave (AK-100) could be filled with the same Calm for 24 missiles - putting something more expensive simply does not make sense. In addition, Shtil is very compact both in weight and dimensions, the Fregat-M2EM track-coordinate radar serves as a detection station, which will be installed anyway during the modernization, and the nuts of the radar illumination do not take up much space, not greatly aggravating and so not the perfect radar appearance of the ship, characteristic of all military ships produced in the mid-80s (of course, from the position of today). Then it would have turned out to be a truly universal ship, posing a threat to all types of targets: underwater, surface, air and land. Moreover, even in such a "fat" layout, it would be possible to carve out a place for Uranus (for example, immediately behind the folding crane, in the PTA-533 area), it would be enough to limit itself to only 2 Dagger drums in the stern (next to RBU-6000), which on most 1155 are already missing due to the fact that the ships were commissioned into the fleet before the complex was put into service and it hardly makes any special sense to "resupply" the ship with all 4 stern drums of the Dagger laid out according to the project.

[Aristarkh Lyudvigovich]

Good evening Cyril I don’t see the point in upgrading 1155 (given the problems of the hull, cable routes, mechanisms, ancient electronics), which are 30 +++ years old, but I understand that with very limited resources and (in many ways) the loss of shipbuilding competencies, repairs with modernization existing units - an inevitable half measure that will save the fleet.

[PROXOR]

Thank. With a dagger just does not reach the destroyer. It’s a pity that at least S-300F missiles cannot be shoved into the UKKS. Although there you need to completely push the target tracking radar.

[bayard]

Quote: Aristarkh Ludwigovich

on "Marshal Shaposhnikov" there will be 2x8 UKSK.

Aristarkh Ludwigovich, but after all, 1155 has enough space for the installation of 3 UKKS, as on the reinforced 22350 (22350+), and such a solution would be more balanced in terms of weapon composition:
- 8 submarines rocket torpedoes;
- 8 anti-ship missiles "Onyx"\"Zircon";
- 8 KR "Caliber" for strikes on the coast.
+ 8 anti-ship missiles "Uran" for lower priority targets.
+ heavy torpedoes that seem to stay in place.

A deeper modernization does not make sense - price, terms of modernization, age of ships.

[PROXOR]

So I sent, it turns out almost the destroyer. What about his air defense? If there is at least Polement Redut, then definitely the Destroyer.

[Grigory_45]

Quote: alexmach

And why not put it for small purposes. The sit is here

there is no need to produce single-purpose systems on the ship that are not compatible with PU. It is logical to put UKKS under Gauges and Onyxes (there are PUs in both UVP and oblique PUs).
Around the world, they switched to UVP, practically abandoning individual launchers. The Americans took Harpoons from Burkov.
UVP allows you to flexibly vary the ammunition depending on the task (PLO, air defense or shock functions)

Quote: alexmach

Still, it would not hurt to have a very small missile system for equipping ships to deal with all sorts of Shahid boats and other non-independent armored boats.

the nearest defense zone should be assigned to artillery (100 mm and AK-630).

But the medium-range air defense system on the BOD would not be in the way. At least Redoubt

[alexmach]

there is no need to produce single-purpose systems on the ship that are not compatible with PU.

Somewhere the estimate for the purchase of equipment for the modernization of "Shaposhnikov" was slipping, the PU "Urana" was listed in it.

It is logical to put UKKS under Gauges and Onyxes (there are PUs in both UVP and oblique PUs).

In the UKSK, the ammunition is not large. Inclined launchers UKSK are not in service on any ship. Moreover, it is not clear whether missiles of the Kallibr family can be launched from them at all. Although, of course, just for the modernization of ships of old projects, they would be just right.

But the medium-range air defense system on the BOD would not be in the way. At least Redoubt

I agree, "Calm-1" was also offered. But here the opinion was given that this would make the modernization too costly, and since the ship is not new, its service life will in any case be limited and it is not rational to invest too much in its modernization.

But in general, it is very interesting to see how the ship will be released after modernization, and it is very desirable to drive out all available 1155 through this modernization

[Dante Alighieri]

Inclined launchers are already being used in some way on submarines undergoing modernization, project 949 Irkutsk and Chelyabinsk. Trusses with guides for Onyx or Caliber rockets are simply installed in the launch cups of the Granites. The launchers of the Granites themselves remain in their rightful place and at their traditional angle. Moreover, due to the fact that 24 Granites turn out to be lighter in weight than 72 Onyx (176 kg versus 640 kg, excluding the weight of the liner truss), it is planned to use combined options, where part of the PU is reserved only for Onyx, and part for lighter Calibers, which means that for the latter there are also no restrictions on the angle of inclination (the main thing, as I understand it, is that the angle is not less than 216 degrees and not more than 000). So everything is possible if there is desire and will.
Damn, I print these lines and understand that we have lost the guaranteed 72 cruise missiles that Belgorod could be equipped with ... Didn’t they see the semi-mythical Khabarovsk under their Poseidons / Statuses?

[Aristarkh Lyudvigovich]

In my opinion, the truss launcher is completely unprotected and inconvenient to reload.

[alexmach]

Cover with armored shields .. With reloading - yes it will lead. But we are not talking about the design of new ships with these launchers, and the existing ones somehow recharge them, while loading the heavy Basalt-Volcanoes.

Gregory below published a photo of a certain inclined farm. Only sources disagreed about what kind of photo. Some say that this is an Indian PU for the Bramos, and here they write here that this is our PU for Caliber
http://rbase.new-factoria.ru/missile/wobb/91re/3c14.shtml
How reliable it really is difficult to judge.

[Aristarkh Lyudvigovich]

Quote: alexmach

and existing ones somehow recharge them

There is a lot of sex with reloading slant launchers. "Mosquito" for EM "Admiral Ushakov"

[alexmach]

But here, perhaps, still returning to the question of balancing the masses ... as they wrote below 2 AK-100s of 35 tons were replaced by AK-190-01 - 15 tons were won by 55 tons, equipped with UKKS - 30 tons, God knows how much it is this bell weighed, but vryatli there remained a large supply of mass on inclined farms ...

[Dante Alighieri]

Well, the Rastrub rocket itself weighed 4 kg., This is without a glass of PU. Onyx weighs 000 kg, again without PU, with it it already weighs 3. But this is Onyx. The caliber (the rocket itself) weighs from 000 to 3 kg, depending on the modification. The question is what to put in the PU? Let's not forget that we are still talking about an anti-submarine, which means that the number of torpedo missiles should be no less than before modernization, that is, 900. This is 1 kg. against 500 old Rastrub torpedo missiles. The stock is another half, this is 2 Onyx or 100 8M-16E (as the golden mean among all the missiles of the Caliber family). And now attention is a question for connoisseurs (rhetorical): is Onyx needed on ships, pr. 000 as such? If it is not needed and we will manage with 32 torpedo missiles and 000 missiles, in general, in terms of the weight of the missiles, everything remains within the same parameters.

As for the ZS-14, then the data varies. I understood one thing for sure - the installation is not universal, and its mass-dimensional indicators vary depending on the length (not the height, namely the length). I believe here again it is necessary to build on whether we are going to place Onyxes on ships of this type, which go beyond the scope of 533 mm in diameter. Again, do not forget that in addition to the weight of the gun mount, it is necessary to take into account the ammunition for it. The mass of ammunition for the AK-100 is 15,6 kg, the number of them on the ship, according to the wiki, is 1200 pieces. This is for 2 towers, one of which is written off completely, and the second is replaced by a lightweight analogue (however, something tells you that the ammunition itself remains the same). Total 600 * 15,6 = 9360 savings.

So preliminary (very rough) calculations show the following picture: the complete rejection of the second artillery released about 45 kg (000 tons of artillery itself and 35 tons of ammunition for it) + replacing the first AK-9,3 with AK-100-190 gives another 01 20 kg of profit. Only 000 tons. Plus, the dismantling of the bell made the ship lighter by another 65 tons (32 kg per rocket). As a result, the volume available to us is 4 tons. Even taking into account that, despite the increased number of missiles, parity is observed in terms of the weight of missiles, we still have 000 tons left. Vicki says that at most one ZS-97 for 65 cells can weigh 14 kg. we get two of them 8 tons (we take this figure as a reference figure, including for an inclined launcher, although according to my feelings it should still be lighter). And we still have 17 tons left. The Navy expects to fill the vacated space with 000 Uraniums of about 24 kg each, i.e. including a container of about 41-16 tons. Even if 700 tons. All the same, there is a reserve of 11-12 tons. Keeping in mind that due to the size of the Polynom, the nose of the 15 is somewhat "overloaded", this may be good, or it may, on the contrary, worsen the ship's centering. I don't know if it needs modeling. I’ll say one thing for sure, my version with 30 missiles of the Calm complex instead of Uranus would somewhat reduce this difference. Based on the fact that the manufacturer indicates the weight of 25M1155ME in TPK at 24 kg, then 9 kg would have come out, 317 missiles would have cost 1050 kg, respectively. All the same, there is a margin to level the mass of the Polynomial, but not so significant as to unbalance the ship. The reorganization proposed by me in the stern of the ship will generally release more than 25 tons (the mass of one Dagger drum module is 200 tons). What is not the place for additional Uranus, as another strong argument? But on the other hand, we would have had quite sane medium and short-range air defense.

[Dante Alighieri]

There is a lot of sex with reloading of inclined launchers.

Recharge is always hemorrhagic

And at the expense of insecurity, there will still be some kind of container. It’s trivial to cover the rocket from precipitation. And stop small fragments stop. It is clear that this is not the side of the ship, but at least something.

There are also pluses: fewer problems with the launch and the likelihood that the rocket leaving the cell will not fall directly onto the deck. And this doesn't just happen to Americans. According to insider information, the last time when missiles were launched from Grigorovich, one fell not far from the ship, one did not come out at all, the rest, however, headed for the targets. So this is a common disease of all vertical launch rockets.

[Zhan]

Quote: venik

Immediately a question: If they put UKSK "Caliber" there, then why the hell is there also "Uranus" ????

Himself at a loss. All the same, a warship of the ocean zone, it would have increased the number of UKSK cells to 32. And for the coastal zone there is a RTO, on them the X-35 "URAN" complex would be installed
Type as 1234EM cipher "OVOD" after modernization. And so this is 16 anti-ship missiles on board this biting fly, it can be very painful to bite. Maybe they decided in order to reduce the cost of work on small surface targets within a radius of 200 km?

[alexmach]

he should increase the number of UKKS cells to 32

Well this is already fantastic. The existing case is not rubber. Although here above mentioned inclined PUs ....

[loki565]

Immediately a question: If the UKSK "Caliber" was installed there, then why the goblin is also needed there "Uranus"?

Most likely for purposes with a small displacement. They probably remembered the sad experience of trying to shoot at boats from the P-120 Malachite

[Aristarkh Lyudvigovich]

Quote: venik

it's just that the AK-190-01 is a better system than the AK-100. It's just that it was initially mass-produced using "stealth" technologies.

In addition, the mass of the AK-190-01, which weighs 15 tons, is half that of the AK-100 (weighs 35 tons).

[Grigory_45]

Quote: Aristarkh Ludwigovich

In addition, the mass of the AK-190-01, which weighs 15 tons, is half that of the AK-100 (weighs 35 tons)

but here everything is not clear.
we read data on AK-190-01:

Weight of the complex - up to 20 kg
Installation weight - up to 15 kg
Ammunition - 80 shots

read the data on the AK-100:

The mass of the complex is 45,5 tons (35.7 tons according to official data)
Ammunition - 175 or 322 rounds (depending on the configuration of the unit)

What does the term "mass of a complex" mean? OU and LMS? AU, MSA and ammunition?

The casing AK-100 is made of aluminum alloys, AK-190 - even from plastic composite materials. Do not you think that the difference of 15-20 tons is a bit much for the tower casing ???

[Ratmir_Ryazan]

of course utter nonsense with "stealth", what is the use of a gun turret, if the architecture of the ship itself is completely different. fellow

This tower was made not for the modernization of the BOD, but for modern frigates, and there the whole hull was made so as to reduce the ESR of the ship.

[Askold Matveev]

In 2016, the largest yacht in the world was launched. It belongs to Alisher Usmanov, whose fortune is currently estimated by Forbes magazine at $12,5 billion. It is called Dilbar and was built by the German shipyard Lurssen. She got her name in honor of the mother of the owner. Prior to this, the largest yachts were considered to be vessels owned by the Sultan of Oman and the Emir of Abu Dhabi, represented by the same company. The length of the new super yacht is 156 meters, displacement - 15 917 tons.
Now we compare with "Shaposhnikov" The total displacement of the ships of the project 1155 - 7570 tons, hull length - 163,5 meters. Speed ​​- up to 32 knots, cruising range - 5 thousand miles at 18 knots, autonomy - 30 days.
And now the question is how many ships of the Navy can be built for the cost of a boat of a thief?

[maidan.izrailovich]

And now the question is how many ships of the Navy can be built for the cost of a boat of a thief?

Are you a room fighter with capitalism?
How old were you in the year 91? If you were an adult, then answer this question yourself. If not, ask your parents.

[Sergey Averchenkov]

So what do you suggest? Writing about a yacht is simple - what do you offer?

[maidan.izrailovich]

It's easy to write about a yacht - what do you suggest?

I propose to stick to the topic given by the article. And do not make yourself a fighter for justice, at every opportunity.

[Sergey Averchenkov]

I did not ask you, but I agree.

[Askold Matveev]

Quote: maidan.izrailovich

I propose to stick to the topic given by the article. And do not make yourself a fighter for justice, at every opportunity.

On this topic, I propose not to rejoice at each new gun, but to build a modern ocean fleet for co-confiscated money from thieves and crooks, rather than coastal coastal boats.
What the fleet was brought to is the shame of modern Russia!
You are trying to enjoy the only ship of the Soviet pr.1155 undergoing modernization, which should end already in 2022! In 2022 there will be one modernized ship. Karl !!!
From 36 Karl! Half of which will be safely written off to Chinese pins by 2022. And in China, meanwhile, it takes 2 years from bookmark to adoption !!! What else do you write on the topic? Characteristics of the new artillery system?
PS

Quote: maidan.izrailovich

Are you a room fighter with capitalism? How old were you in the year 91?

At the time of the coup, I was in my 25th year, and what makes it easier for you?

[carstorm 11]

Yes, who is against it. the only question is, can you prove that he stole them? or those who are rich want to dispossess without a trial and investigation and evidence? note a logical question.

[polar fox]

Quote: carstorm 11

and you can prove that he stole them?

in the "fairest court" no. but witnesses are still alive who knew his dad very well and how he robbed Uzbekistan.

[carstorm 11]

the court does not prove. I said about the evidence and not the verdict. I didn’t talk about dad either.

[Amateur]

This mosque in Tashkent, as they say, was built with the money of A. Usmanov

[mvg]

can you prove that he stole them?

I’ve driven, if I remember correctly, “Uzbek”, owns about 30 percent of the shares of FC Arsenal London. At one time, Absolut was selling vodka vodka (up to 70 percent of the market), this is what I remember. Spouse - Olympic champion Irina Viner.
PS: But a good man .. here Giner recently helped Vlašić sign.

[Askold Matveev]

Quote: Sergey Averchenkov

So what do you suggest? Writing about a yacht is simple - what do you offer?

stop the theft of the budget in the country and confiscate the stolen goods.

[Sergey Averchenkov]

Revolution? Civil War? Do you understand what you're talking about? Who will give you stolen just like that? Although ... in principle, I do not mind. In addition to civil.

[solzh]

It is not possible to stop plundering in the country under the bourgeois-oligarchic system. Only by changing the system to the Soviet one will we be able to stop the embezzlement of the budget and punish those responsible.

[fk7777777]

M, yes, a complete confiscation, and for each ship built for take-off, beat this relative, friend, etc., of this abomination. And hang him at the flagship’s yard, may the people have a holiday.

[solzh]

Quote: fk7777777

full confiscation

I think the people will not be against these actions in relation to bribe-takers and other corrupt officials.

[Aristarkh Lyudvigovich]

Quote: Askold Matveev

The new superyacht is 156 meters long and has a displacement of 15 tons. Now we compare with "Shaposhnikov". The total displacement of the ships of the project 917 is 1155 tons, the hull length is 7570 meters.

15 917 is not a displacement, but a gross tonnage. You are comparing the displacement of the BOD and the gross tonnage of the yacht. It's like comparing tomatoes and cucumbers. "Gross tonnage" refers to gross tonnage. It is measured in register tons - this is a unit of volume - a cubic meter of internal space in the case. The greater the tonnage, the more useful the yacht can carry on board. The displacement of the yacht Dilbar can be easily estimated using the formula GRT = 4/9 D where: grt - gross tonnage, D - displacement in full load (Displacement). And it will turn out about 7000 tons. And here Alisher Burkhanovich acted as a very deeply understanding yacht owner.

[ZAV69]

And not how much. Because the money for which the yacht is built is not public but private. It is necessary to discuss how honestly they are earned elsewhere, and this post here smacks of cheap populism.

[Thrifty]

Is it dust in your eyes instead of "superpots"? And how many of them will go through such a modernization? ??

[Grigory_45]

Quote: Thrifty

Is it instead of "superpot" dust in the eyes?

de facto, the BOD of project 1155 are the only Russian serial ocean-going ships, since all the rest are represented by single samples. It is foolish to refuse ships that can still be pulled up to an acceptable level in terms of combat capabilities.

Quote: Thrifty

And how many of them will undergo such modernization?

so far only Shaposhnikov has been announced. After assessing what the modernization will result in (in terms of efficiency and cost), there will be a decision on the remaining BOD of this project.

[Ratmir_Ryazan]

In some news I read that it was not installed STELS tower!
That is, the enemy, without detecting the AU, will safely shout to the buffet!

The tower is set so because only such now do for all ships, new and old.

With BOD, the ship is being modernized, and not restored as a museum exhibit.

Or did you expect, since the ship was old-built, then the plant producing artillery for the fleet needed to put a new gun for it in the old building? )))

[loki565]

So this gun now goes as a unified one, for many ships, why put a gun on each ship, especially the old version.

[Snail N9]

And the four-meter barrels on the radars do not "shine", yeah. On "Zemvolts" - there, yes - "do not shine", where the trunks are completely retracted into the tower.

[KCA]

The barrel length of the Zamwolt cannon is 9.61m, plus the breech end is at least one meter, probably not less than one and a half, what size is the art tower, if it can easily fit a gun over 11 meters long? In addition, there must also be a mechanism that removes and advances the weapon, did you not confuse Zamwalt with the imperial Death Star?

[Avior]

I don’t know what mechanism, but, surprisingly, the Zamvolt’s trunks didn’t really stick out;

I think one of the components of the constant price tag Zamvolta

[KCA]

The guns are not removed, they fall below the level of the sides and are closed by shields, or removed altogether, for there is no sense in them, at a cost of one shot of $ 800

[Avior]

The guns are lowered and retracted into the recess in the upper part of the tower and the superstructure in front of it and are covered by a shutter

I can’t imagine how much it cost, obviously the Pleasure is expensive, but there is nothing cheap for Zamvolt, he himself is exorbitant :)
Something like that

[fk7777777]

No, an imperial star is cheaper than this gibberish.

[venik]

Quote: KCA

what size does an art tower have if a gun more than 11 meters long can easily fit in it?

=========
In fact, the respected "Snitch" is simply not in the know! The weapon is not "removed" anywhere there (here you absolutely right!), just in the stowed position the barrel is lowered (tilted down) into the "P" -shaped box with a stealth coating located in front of the tower! This is clearly seen in the picture from last year's article on VO (https://topwar.ru/152628-jesmincy-zumwalt-velichajshij-proval-v-istorii-vms-ssha.html):

[Avior]

Actually, it can be said that the weapon is removed in the box of the tower and superstructure, but he did not write that it was being drawn into the tower, for example.
The fact that it really doesn’t stick out, I honestly don’t remember another such case

[venik]

Quote: Avior

The fact that it really doesn’t stick out, I honestly don’t remember another such case

========
Well then, take a look at the Swedish corvettes of the Visby type:

By the way - VERY interesting boats !!!!

[Avior]

Right, you're right, Visby
Only the caliber of the gun is noticeably different
But the principle is almost the same

[aristok]

Instead of two, one.
And good (relief, cheaper)
and bad (more risk of being left without a tool at all).

[UVB]

Quote: aristok

Instead of two, one.
And good (relief, cheaper)
and bad (more risk of being left without a tool at all).

A universal rocket launcher is installed at the site of the second gun mount

new

[Avior]

. In place of the second gun mount, a universal missile launcher is installed

And this is a very correct decision, two modern guns on the ship

[Grigory_45]

Quote: Avior

two modern guns on the ship

but the caliber should be increased ...

[Avior]

Perhaps it will do for a frigate
So that more or less by air, and by sea and by land I could work
Not enough for sushi, of course, but you have to pay for universality

[Grigory_45]

Quote: Avior

Perhaps it will do for a frigate
So that more or less by air, and by sea and by land I could work
Not enough for sushi, of course, but you have to pay for universality

we have a good 130 mm A-192

[Mountain shooter]

A completely equivalent replacement. 80 per minute 100 mm !!! Previously, from two barrels probably shot the same amount?
And the fact that the tower "Stealth" - so now others and do not!
However, no ... The original guns had a rate of 60 per minute. Well, maybe the accuracy has become higher ...

[Uncle lee]

Quote: Mountain Shooter

Stealth

Now everything is stealth: ships, pensions, rockets, salaries, planes ...

[fk7777777]

There was a large anti-submarine one, but it became a frigate, the assignment of tasks has changed. That is why...

[Grigory_45]

Quote: fk7777777

There was a large anti-submarine one, but it became a frigate, the assignment of tasks has changed. That is why...

not therefore. We just go over to the import classification of the ranks of the ships - there were no corvette or frigate classes in the USSR Navy. Nowadays, MRK and IPC have become corvettes, and everything that cannot be affixed to the "destroyer" or "cruiser" nameplate are frigates.

[Grigory_45]

Quote: Mountain Shooter

Previously, from two barrels probably shot the same amount?

A pair of AK-100s have a technical rate of fire of 120 rounds / min (60 per barrel). One AK-190 - 80 rounds / min.

Quote: Mountain Shooter

And the fact that the tower "Stealth" - so now others and do not!

do. Here is a photo of the tower, which was put on frigates pr.11356

Quote: Mountain Shooter

Well, maybe the accuracy has become higher ...

accuracy depends on the fire control system.

[Lopatov]

Quote: Gregory_45

accuracy depends on the fire control system.

Not only.
It depends on everything.
Even the quality of a thermometer that measures the temperature of charges.

[Ratmir_Ryazan]

do. Here is a photo of the tower, which was put on frigates pr.11356

for what?

Here are frigates pr.11356 Grigorovich, Makarov and Essen - everywhere the tower is angular for low visibility -

The rounded towers went to frigates for India, simply because they were laid earlier and the new tower was not ready yet, but now they all go the same type and no one will specifically do a tower with a large EPR, since this is not necessary and will require additional costs -

[Grigory_45]

Quote: Ratmir_Ryazan

for what?

Indian Talwars. They were built in Russia and have project number 11356. Russian "admirals" are pr.11356R

[Ratmir_Ryazan]

Well, Indian corvettes were built earlier, and probably the new turret with a gun was not yet ready.

[venik]

Quote: Mountain Shooter

A completely equivalent replacement. 80 per minute 100 mm !!! Previously, from two barrels probably shot the same amount?

======
Not. AK-100 has a rate of fire 60 rounds/min, AK-190 - 80! The gain is in cost (the 190s cost more than 2 times cheaper) and in weight (AK-190 - 15 tons, AK-100 - 35 tons !!). That. gain in weight - 55 tons! This allows instead of the second tower to place the UKKS "Caliber" (14 tons - for 8 cells, in running order - approx. 30 tons). That is, if the Rastrub-B is replaced by the Kh-35 Uran (which is very doubtful, but in principle it is possible!), then it is possible to mantulate the 16-cell UKKS .... Although this is all just speculation .....

[Sky strike fighter]

Air defense on the ship upgraded?

[alexmach]

According to preliminary data, no.

[Dart2027]

It is interesting to see what happens.

[UVB]

And my question is: ships of the project 1155 in the Russian Navy are listed as ships of the 1st rank. To what rank will Marshal Shaposhnikov now belong? After all, frigates (patrol ships) belong to the 2nd rank. Does this mean that "Marshal Shaposhnikov" will be downgraded or frigates of the 1st rank will appear?

[fk7777777]

In my opinion, it’s clear that the class of the ship is reduced ..

[alexmach]

Not a fact, it seems that it was a question of the fact that Frigates 22350 are assigned to the first ranks. Another thing is that "Shaposhnikov" is far from 22350 in terms of capabilities ...

[venik]

Quote: UVB

And I have this question: ships of the project 1155 in the Russian Navy appear ships of the 1st rank.

=======
It's completely incomprehensible to me too!
According to the displacement (7 / 000 thousand tons) - 7% ship of the 800st rank (i.e. - the OCEAN zone)! Watchmen (aka frigates) - ships of the 100nd rank (distant sea zone) - to 6 tons .....
Well, we could destroyer "retrain" (if you have already switched to the "international" classification). Or some "smart" head decided that in comparison with the "Burks" in terms of armament, it will not look very good ..... In general, it is not clear !!!

[UVB]

As far as I understand, when qualifying, they don't really bother with displacement. Remember the cruiser pr.58 "Grozny". A total displacement of less than 6000 tons, were laid down as destroyers and with "destroyer" names, then they were retrained into cruisers. And the higher the rank of the ship, respectively, and the positions are higher.

[aristok]

rate of fire
AK-100 - 60 rpm
A-190 - 80 rpm

The weight of the new gun mount has been reduced.
Earlier (in 2012) there were complaints about the reliability of the A-190.
Hope it's fixed now.

[venik]

Quote: aristok

Earlier (in 2012) there were complaints about the reliability of the A-190.
Hope it's fixed now.

========
As far as I understood from various sources - A-190-01 is exactly the "modified" version, in which "childhood diseases" were eliminated.

[Grigory_45]

Quote: venik

As far as I understood from various sources - A-190-01 is exactly the "modified" version, which eliminated "childhood diseases"

A-190-01 is an AU with a stealth turret
A190E - standard tower (which was placed on the Talvars)

[zyablik.olga]

Actually, the ship was built in 1986, a bit old.

before modernization: two 45-mm semi-automatic guns 21-KM,

Typo?

[fk7777777]

Yes, not from the Battle of Stalingrad, fluffs of 45, ki remained, well, don’t throw it away, but they’ve attached it)))

[Grigory_45]

Quote: zyablik.olga

before modernization: two 45-mm semi-automatic guns 21-KM,
Typo?

not. These are 45 mm salute guns

[venik]

Quote: zyablik.olga

before modernization: two 45-mm semi-automatic guns 21-KM,
Typo?

=====
Not at all! No typo. On many ships of that time such guns were actually put (usually 2 each). Of course, they did not have combat significance, but were used as signal or salute.

[Grigory_45]

Quote: venik

Of course, they did not have combat significance, but were used as signal or salute

In comparison with standard weapons - yes, they do not.
But in order to open fire, say, on some scandal, it is theoretically enough to put the sight in place and drive the shell into the breech. All shoot. In principle, this is a real military weapon.

[Sergey Averchenkov]

Well, that's nice, what else to say?

[IgorIP]

".... two 45-mm semi-automatic guns 21-KM ..."
These guns will definitely remain after modernization)) because these are salute guns)

[fk7777777]

Yeah, anti-tank,))) ...

[Grigory_45]

The former large anti-submarine ship undergoing repairs and modernization, re-qualified to the frigate "Marshal Shaposhnikov", is changing its artillery. Instead of two bow 100-mm AK-100 guns, the ship will receive a 100-mm gun mount A-190-01

artillery on these (rather large - 7,5 thousand tons) ships has not shone since the moment of construction. All the same, a ship of the 1st rank, 130-mm A-192 (which is also interfaced with the Puma artillery fire control system and the Fregat-type radar) could have been installed instead of "two by one hundred" (for the bourgeois on the "Burks" 127- mm gun mount)
By the way, the A-192 is on the frigates of the project 22350 of the "Admiral Gorshkov" type

In the course of modernization, Marshal Shaposhnikov has already installed the Uran anti-ship complex with Kh-35 missiles, a universal launcher for Kalibr, Onyx or Zircon cruise missiles

and why does the ship need both "Caliber" ("Onyx") and "Uranus" ??? Or, they were stuck instead of "Trumpet" so that the place would not be lost ???

[Dart2027]

Quote: Gregory_45

Or, instead of "Trumpet" they were stuck, so that the place would not be lost

Rather, simply because it’s not possible to shove a sufficient number of Caliber, as well as some kind of weapon.

[Grigory_45]

Quote: Dart2027

Rather, simply because it’s not possible to shove a sufficient number of calibers, as well as some kind of weapon

For Caliber and others like them there are inclined PUs. A raznosortitsa in armaments is not a blessing

[Dart2027]

Quote: Gregory_45

For Gauges and others like them, there are inclined PUs.

The question is whether they will fit into the place of the Waterfall. Uranium is less.

[Dante Alighieri]

The funny thing is that the inclined launcher is already being used on submarines undergoing modernization, pr. 949 Irkutsk and Chelyabinsk. Trusses with guides for Onyx or Caliber rockets are simply installed in the launch cups of the Granites. The launchers of the Granites themselves remain in their rightful place and at their traditional angle. But for some reason, when it comes to the implementation of such solutions on surface ships (primarily Soviet-built, which need modernization, but whose major alteration is meaningless), big minds in the Admiralty simply fall into prostration and begin to talk some kind of nonsense.

[d4rkmesa]

And that's good! "Daggers" would still be modernized. Yes, I know that any new air defense system would be even better, but it would be nice to restore production and "make friends" with the new missile with modules. It's bad that everything is going in favor of some "Shells" on the deck.

[Dante Alighieri]

It was rumored that, in order to unify the land TORs, they would begin to equip the 9M100, which is for a second the Reduta / S-350 missile, which means it can be guided by means of existing radars (short-range missiles), without the need to spend money on expensive and useless Furke, which in fact, without AFAR Polymenta works at the same range as the AP Dagger.

And if you believe the rumors about the fact that the first launches of Redoubt from corvettes in the Baltic Sea were carried out generally with the help of Puma, i.e. radar art. installation, then such a unification no longer seems to be a figment of a sick imagination

[mmaxx]

Particularly worried about the fate of the most formidable guns - 21-KM. How now without them? Our most common naval gun.

[Vasyan1971]

the fate of the weapons on the BOD before the modernization remained unknown: two 45-mm 21-KM semi-automatic cannons, four 30-mm AK-630 ZAK, two Kinzhal air defense missile systems, two Rastrub-B anti-submarine systems, two rocket-bomb installations RBU-6000, as well as torpedo tubes.

"Guarded" and sold.

[Adimius38]

Of course, it is a good modernization, but all this is hastily done due to the fact that for more than three decades not a single frigate or destroyer with a class of more than 7000 tons has been built. Therefore, they remembered the old Soviet BODs and decided to make frigates out of them. You can’t call it otherwise than blurring the eyes. It would be better if they name at which shipyard in Russia a strike surface ship with a class of more than 7000 tons is laid down or in the process of construction, they will not name it.

[Imperial Technocrat]

Total displacement of ships of the project 1155 - 7570 tons

What kind of frigate is this? This is a destroyer

[Avior]

The destroyer is determined not only by displacement

[Imperial Technocrat]

Then it's MRK

[Avior]

Defined as a frigate in general
Do not put polynomial on RTOs

[Imperial Technocrat]

So the boat

[89625588851]

And why not the A-192 caliber 130mm, wouldn’t it really fit ...

[K-50]

The two A-100 gun mounts previously installed on the ship were developed back in the 70s of the last century and were clearly visible on enemy radars.

What nonsense!!!
There, compared with the ship itself, the luminescence on the radar from the gun turrets is slightly different from zero !!!
The areas are not even comparable, they differ hundreds of times !!!
Another thing is that instead of the second gun turret, you can squeeze in something else, but the "stealth" version of the turret is not an argument at all.

[Kaw]

Instead of two 100 mm installations, they set one 100 mm installation.

[75 Sergey]

I wonder how this will help the gunners, and how did they solve the issue of thermal radiation from hot barrels?

[Protos]

Quote: Askold Matveev

In 2016, the largest yacht in the world was launched. It belongs to Alisher Usmanov, whose fortune is currently estimated by Forbes magazine at $12,5 billion. It is called Dilbar and was built by the German shipyard Lurssen. She got her name in honor of the mother of the owner. Prior to this, the largest yachts were considered to be vessels owned by the Sultan of Oman and the Emir of Abu Dhabi, represented by the same company. The length of the new super yacht is 156 meters, displacement - 15 917 tons.
Now we compare with "Shaposhnikov" The total displacement of the ships of the project 1155 - 7570 tons, hull length - 163,5 meters. Speed ​​- up to 32 knots, cruising range - 5 thousand miles at 18 knots, autonomy - 30 days.
And now the question is how many ships of the Navy can be built for the cost of a boat of a thief?

Microsoft founder Bill Gates paid $ 644 million to buy a hydrogen-powered Sinot Aqua, Mashable reports.
The 112-meter yacht has five decks, which can accommodate 14 guests and 31 people from the crew. The ship also has a panoramic pool, relaxation area, cinema, spa, gym, beauty salon, helicopter and observation deck.

The yacht became the first such vessel, completely powered by hydrogen, which makes it safe for the environment. Sinot Aqua can sail 6500 km without refueling at a maximum speed of 31 km / h.

And now the question is: how much for the cost of a yacht of one thief can you build ships for the US Navy?

[asr55]

Project 1155 ships with a total displacement of 7480 tons belong to ships of the 1st rank. In the presence of shock and anti-submarine weapons after modernization, they will most likely be destroyers.