Sea power and cruise missiles. How does the fleet use Caliber?

Combat use of the Kyrgyz Republic 3M14 Caliber against terrorists in Syria from the frigate Admiral Essen

Russia is the only country in the world deploying long-range cruise missiles on small ships with a displacement of less than 1000 tons. This state of affairs has largely become a coincidence. First, the president had questions about why we ship to India. weaponwhich our fleet does not have, then there was a powerful “impulse” of the Navy, which forced the fleet to acquire a universal launcher 3C-14 included in the UKKS - a universal naval firing complex on a Caspian missile ship flotilla Dagestan.

The first swallow of the Navy - UVP 3S-14 of the Dagestan missile ship of the Caspian flotilla

Then the almighty General Staff entered the game, driven mainly by natives of the ground forces, who on the one hand do not fully imagine how to maximize the potential of the fleet, as a type of aircraft, on the other they consider themselves competent enough to determine the direction of development of the Navy - and have enough power for this. After Dagestan there was a General Staff directive to ensure the use of long-range cruise missiles “from specialized missile ships”. After that, budgetary constraints and a random factor with the non-launch of the Zvezda diesel engine came into play during the exercises at one of the project 21630 MAKs in the presence of the Commander-in-Chief Vysotsky and other dignitaries.

The synergistic effect of all these things was generated by a specialized projectile rocket ship of project 21631 “Buyan-M” with a German MTU diesel engine, and its high price, the presence of irreplaceable import units that fell under the sanctions and the desire of another commander in chief - Korolyov, to have “their own” ship, gave birth to “Karakurt ". In general, those interested in the issue may refer to the article “Does the fleet need small missile ships”where the question of the importance of RTOs for the Navy is disclosed.

But, one way or another, these ships were actually involved in military operations. In an interview, President Putin said bluntly that we need not violate the Treaty on the Elimination of Intermediate and Shorter-Range Missiles, since such missiles are based on ships. We add that they are based under the coast, almost in the same place as land launchers could have been. “Buyan-M” is, relatively speaking, army ships - substitutes for ground launchers, which I would very much like to have army officers from the General Staff, but it was impossible. This continued until the Americans destroyed the INF Treaty.

On August 2, 2019, the United States finally left it and almost immediately conducted a test launch of the Tomahawk KR from an improvised ground launcher. The external effect of this launch left "in the shadow" the fact of the existence of a huge US Army missile program, begun long before the American propaganda machine began to make claims to Russia in violation of the Treaty. Here is just one example from the line of missile weapons being created for the American ground forces — the Long Range Hypersonic Weapon (LRHW), in Russian - “long-range hypersonic weapons.” This is a hypersonic glider mounted on a rocket launched from a mobile chassis. The weapon promises to be very dangerous and difficult to break.

The US withdrawal from the Treaty creates a somewhat new situation in the development of missile weapons. On the one hand, now our hands are also untied. On the other hand, the question arises of the number of missiles, or rather, even to get the maximum salvo for minimal money. And thirdly, questions arise about whether those capable of deploying cruise missiles used by the Navy are meaningful. And does the fleet miss any opportunities? In order to understand the full depth of the problem, let us turn to what possibilities the liquidation of the INF Treaty offers to the RF Armed Forces.

Ground launchers

As you know, the Caliber family of missiles appeared on the basis of the Soviet Granat family cruise missiles - very similar to the Caliber 3M14 long-range missiles, which were supposed to be launched through torpedo tubes of submarines. A characteristic difference between the Grenade and the Caliber was the presence of only a nuclear warhead. The anti-ship version of the rocket, which today, after many years of evolution, is known as 3M54, also first flew to the USSR. And along with the complex for the Navy was created and its land, army version - RK-55 "Relief", which included a mobile launcher on a car chassis, providing the launch of six cruise missiles.

PU KR RK-55 "Relief". Six cruise missiles on a car chassis, almost RTOs

It is impossible not to note that such installations a priori have greater combat stability than RTOs. RTOs are attached to reservoirs. A land launcher can be located anywhere on the territory of Russia, in forests, in buildings and structures in the city, as it is, well camouflaged. RTOs are indivisible and always represent a single target. The ground battery can be dispersed on the ground. The defeat of even one missile RTOs at least incapacitates it and makes it ineffective or destroys. The defeat of one of the launch leads to a reduction in volley, and the defeat of some of the control machines requires only the replacement of the control machine. A ground-based missile defense system may be located inside a well-defended air defense area in the depths of defense, and RTOs have other vulnerabilities besides an air strike - for example, it is threatened by submarines, surface ships, and sea mines during transitions. The only exception is the RTO of the Caspian flotilla, but in the case of economic factors begin to work with them.

Ground installations are disproportionately more cost-effective. Let us compare the slightly modernized RK Iskander and RTOs in terms of economic efficiency.

RTO provides a salvo of eight cruise missiles. The modernized launcher of the Iskander complex provides the launch of two cruise missiles. The dual-battery division (two launchers in each battery) thus provides the equivalent of multiple rocket launchers for multiple launch rockets, but at the cost of an incommensurably greater combat stability. How much does a division cost?

PU RK "Iskander" with two cruise missiles. In their place may be slightly different missiles with a completely different range.

In those years in which the data on the cost of RTOs and Iskander complexes fell into open sources, it turned out that the Iskander RK division costs about a third less than the Buyan-M or Karakurt RTOs with Armor , or almost as much as Karakurt without the Shell, which is generally defenseless from air strikes, and which they will no longer build.

Thus, we have the right to compare MRCs for 9-10 billion and the land launch division for 6-7 billion, which provide the same salvo of the same missiles. Corrected for inflation, the proportions between prices will be the same today.

But here the details begin. Volley, it is not just like that - it is in a unit of time. RTOs are reloaded with missiles during the day, plus it takes time to leave the base and return to it. If we neglect the fact that naval bases will be attacked by a strong enemy in the very first hours of the conflict, and the fact that while the ship is in the base, it is exposed to maximum danger, then we can assume that the ship is capable of firing up to eight missiles per day (in fact, the ship will be tasked with eliminating such frequent reloadingbut we make an assumption).

And the ground division? And the ground division, having shot its eight missiles, will be ready to shoot again in two hours. And two hours later - again. And so on. The division includes a transport-loading machine, and in the connection, which includes the division, delivery works, at least in the rear areas. It is possible to deploy a missile brigade in the rear areas without problems - the range of the missiles allows. Thus, the approximate maximum daily salvo of a division can be estimated at the same eight missiles, but every two hours (if there are missiles themselves and targets for them). Which results in TWELVE TIME a larger volley per day than an RTO can provide. For less (not counting the cost of expendable missiles) money.

However, we can go a little further. Until this moment, we considered the almost standard Iskander launcher, with a pair of cruise missiles, as the basic launcher.

But Russia still has something else in store. We look at the launcher of the export version of Caliber - the Club complex. Instead of a pair of missiles, four were used. On a similar four-axle chassis from the same manufacturer - MZKT.

PU RK "Club" - four missiles by car, half RTOs

How much more will such an installation be compared to the standard Iskander PU? Yes, almost no matter how much, against the background of billions of the cost of one division, a somewhat redesigned PU will simply be lost. Perhaps it will be about the fact that the entire division with such installations will cost half a billion more, and this is the ceiling. But this money is not just spent, they are spent in exchange for DOUBLE salvo. There were eight missiles every two hours, it became sixteen. With missiles, transport, and targets, one division will be able to hit up to 192 targets at the maximum pace. And it will still be cheaper than MRK. Which can hit eight targets per day (in the absolute limit and ideal conditions, up to firing from the base). Not a bad difference, is it?

And if you spend money on OCD on a new launcher and play the “Relief” launcher? Then we did not double the volley for almost the same money, but triple it, because, we repeat, the "relief" launcher carries 6 missiles. And transport-loading machines will install as many transport-launch containers, if necessary.

Here, of course, you can start arguing. So, for example, the usual two-missile launcher RK Iskander allows you to use not only cruise missiles, but also missiles with a quasi-ballistic flight path. At a shorter (so far) range, they achieve their goal much faster due to speed. When hitting a failed to get out of attack aviation enemy or for some mobile purpose (a stopped air defense missile system on the march, for example), these missiles may not be alternative - the winged versions of the Caliber will take quite a while to fly. The goal may go away - this is not a fact, but it is possible.

An example of universality - two different missiles on one launcher

And the multi-missile launchers optimized for cruise missiles, apparently, cannot use other types of missiles.

The discussion about the benefits of different types of missiles will lead us too far. Another thing is important - when choosing the type of launchers in Russia, hands are completely untied. On its technological base, it can form any combination of launchers - just make the Iskander, equipping it with more and more advanced missiles, or build up a salvo to the detriment of some other advantages.

Remembering the failed container launchers for surface ships, let’s say that such installations could prove to be effective on the road, and then the four “ground Caliber” could be carried on its semi-trailer by an ordinary KAMAZ tractor - in addition to the Iskander or instead them.

Time

Two. Drop the sides of the semitrailer, take the tractor with the same model, but of a military standard, and paint everything in camouflage. It will be much cheaper than the Iskander and difficult to distinguish from a simple road train

In the end, the French had the HADES missile system in the dimensions of a conventional tractor with a semi-trailer.

HADES. An ordinary tractor with a non-driving front axle, not even an all-terrain vehicle, just off-road tires. From afar, the complex is indistinguishable from a simple road train

This is also possible with us.

Now we formulate the first most important consequence of the collapse of the INF Treaty - at Euro-strategic ranges, ground launchers are disproportionately more effective than small missile ships. Their missile salvo per unit time is more than ship’s volley at times or tens of times at lower cost and greater combat stability.

Does this mean that the construction of RTOs is a waste of money? Yes, it does. Does it mean that ships are pointless to arm with cruise missiles? No, but we must do it right, using the strengths of this type of armed forces, such as the navy.

Naval way

When using missile weapons against ground targets, the fleet, being an expensive weapon compared to army missile brigades, has a tremendous advantage over the ground forces - an unattainable level of mobility for the latter. A ship is able to travel more than 600 kilometers in a day on an economic course. For bulky all-terrain rocket launcher chassis, this is an unattainable value in itself. But the point is that, in order to compare with the ship, they must be able to cross the front line with the enemy, or, if there is no war at the borders, then the state border, and sometimes more than one. And this is not even negotiable.

In addition, the ship can increase speed and go more than 1000 kilometers per day. Thus, we formulate the fundamental difference between warships and missile units of the ground forces.

Warships and naval formations are capable of quickly pushing the line of launch of cruise missiles by many hundreds or thousands of kilometers, which is absolutely inaccessible to ground-based missile units.

In this parameter, ships even surpass aviation - the latter will not always be able to provide the presence of cruise missiles somewhere in the South Atlantic, and ships will. In some cases, aviation will need coordination with foreign governments regarding the passage through the airspace of third countries - and not the fact that this will succeed. In any case, aviation will need refueling in the air, and it will seriously limit its capabilities.

Also, ships that are already deployed in the designated area are trite faster than aviation. It sounds unusual, but it does. A missile ship, after receiving an order to strike, will send its missiles to the target at the most within an hour, even if everything happens in the Caribbean. The bomber will need to fly for many hours to the launch line from Russian territory.

In addition, there is another factor.

We formulate one more specific quality of ships as a combat weapon.

Ships armed with cruise missiles can be located in an area remote from the territory of the Russian Federation, from which missiles can be launched on target for an extremely long time - months. With the rotation of the ships, it is possible to have cruise missiles in the right area of ​​the world almost forever.

Suppose we are dealing with some kind of military-political crisis around Venezuela. It is easy to imagine the deployment of a naval strike group in the Western Atlantic, with a hundred cruise missiles - if we were smarter, we would already have such capabilities on old ships and submarines, but we will never be smarter, so we will have them in the second half of 2020- x years on new ships and submarines. But there will be anyway. We can already deploy dozens of missiles on frigates of projects 22350 and 11356 and the Severodvinsk submarine, which was recently shot by the Caliber. And such a group, while ensuring the interchangeability of ships in it, will always be there, if necessary.

Let us give an example from reality - during the recent aggravation of the situation in the Syrian province of Idlib, and possible clashes between the RF Armed Forces and the Turkish Armed Forces on Syrian territory, three frigates of Project 11356 with the Caliber KR were deployed in the eastern part of the Mediterranean Sea. I must say that they were extremely vulnerable there - Russia insanely thoughtlessly allowed the fleet to lose anti-submarine forces, and Turkey has good submarines with good torpedoes, and Turkey's surface forces still had an overwhelming numerical superiority at that time. Even if all Turkish aviation was busy fighting the Russian Air Force and the Syrian Air Force on two fronts - in Syria itself and over the Black Sea, the Turks would still have enough ships and submarines to destroy our weak grouping without their airplanes.

But before that, a volley of 24 cruise missiles would come to them, which, due to being close to Turkish territory, would very quickly hit the assigned targets without giving Turkey many hours of odds, as it would launch missiles from the Caspian RTOs. This deployment of forces, which is generally flawed, nevertheless demonstrates well to us how to properly use naval missiles, and what "at a minimum" should be their carriers. The Turks would have to pay dearly for the destruction of frigates, each of which has 24 missiles (72 in the group), not a modern, but fully operational RLC, an excellent cannon with a caliber of 100 millimeters. It’s not even a fact that a sudden Turkish strike on them, then, after the battle, would not have allowed at least part of the ships to shoot back with “Caliber”. And this is one of their cardinal advantages over RTOs even in such a task as launching a missile launcher on coastal targets.

What other features and advantages do ships have over other carriers of the Kyrgyz Republic - ground launchers and aircraft? An important advantage of the fleet is the ability to provide a massive salvo.

Each individual ship may not have very many missiles. For example, for a frigate of project 22350 with a pair of 3C-14 installations, it seems logical to occupy no more than eight cells in launchers for such missiles, because you still need to have PLUR for self-defense against submarines and anti-ship missiles to protect against surface ships or attack them. But three such frigates with such loading are already 24 cruise missiles, while maintaining all the other capabilities of the ship, and the two banal Varshavyanka operating in the same area will add eight more missiles without affecting the presence of torpedo weapons on board. Another 22350 of a new type, with 24 missiles, will already add at least 10 missiles to the unit, bringing its total salvo to 44 missiles. The modernized Nakhimov’s approach to joining this group and the replacement of Varshavyanyok Yasenem will already raise the number of simultaneous salvos far beyond a hundred missiles. Moreover, where missiles from the territory of Russia either do not reach at all, or will fly for many hours.

These are the advantages of deploying missile launchers on ships - the ability to extend the launch line anywhere far, the possibility of forming a very powerful (especially in conjunction with cash bombers) volley with a small scope (time-compressed, massive) and the possibility of long duty in the designated area in constant readiness for application immediate hit.

Separately, it is worth mentioning submarines as carriers. At present, the secrecy of submarines is already incomparable with what it was forty or fifty years ago. The full use of the US and NATO of its anti-submarine potential will dramatically reduce the ability of submarines to covertly deploy anywhere. But even in such conditions, with proper security measures, it will nevertheless sometimes be possible. And then, in addition to the advantages available to the surface forces, one more will be added - the ability to concentrate a large number of missiles is HIDDEN for the enemy. This will not always turn out, but sometimes it will. And it can be of great value.

Alas, the path that the Navy has chosen to deploy cruise missiles on ships makes it very weak to take advantage of the ships as carriers. RTOs due to low seaworthiness and near-zero capabilities in terms of self-defense, as well as due to low autonomy, simply can not perform such tasks in an environment where the enemy can attack them. RTOs are an instrument of purely peacetime, if the enemy puts up resistance, they become almost useless, since they can only duplicate ground launchers, the advantages of which are described above over RTOs. Being part of the ship’s group, they cannot in all cases maneuver together with large ships, either because of the principle of low speed (project 21631) or because of its rapid loss in waves (project 22800). Yes, and in principle they lack seaworthiness.

It is not superfluous to recall. RTO "Great Ustyug" project 21631 in the storm. The annotation indicates that seven points, but even visually shows that no more than four. In such conditions, there can be no talk of any combat use or separation from the enemy - in a real war the ship is doomed

Recently, the situation, however, if it did not start to improve, then it ceased to distort. The Varshavyanki descend from the slipways, with the possibility of using cruise missiles, frigates of project 22350 are regularly laid - saving our forces for the far sea zone and, in a sense, the last hope not to lose the fleet as an effective instrument of international politics and a hypothetical “big” war. Submarines of the “Ash” type are being built - with all the flaws of these submarines carefully concealed by the Ministry of Defense and the Navy command (see, for example, M. Klimov’s article "AIC" Severodvinsk delivered with critical deficiencies for the Navy " or his article "What to ask" Ashen ") they still carry a substantial missile arsenal, and in universal launchers. And the shortcomings can partly be eliminated on already built ships, if, firstly, you recognize them, and secondly, you can really deal with the elimination. And about the increase in the series of RTOs over previously announced ships, nothing is heard, which is also good.

For these pluses, you should not lose sight of the minuses - instead of quickly re-equipping old ships with Caliber in inclined launchers, the development of which would take a maximum of six years, from the time the OCD was opened until the product received the serial letter, the expensive and time-consuming option was chosen replacing 100 mm artillery mounts with a pair of 3C-14 launchers for BOD, and other large surface ships with inclined missile launch - the destroyers of project 956 and cruiser 1164 remain with their old weapons. For more details, see the article. “At an angle to the horizon. "Caliber" needs installation for inclined launch ".

For some unbelievable reason, the Caliber’s mass equipment of nuclear submarines of projects 971, 945, 945A and DEPLs of project 877, which are in operation, at least those whose decommissioning is not planned in the foreseeable future, did not start. This is all the more incomprehensible because the 971th project and project 945A were intended for the use of the KR "Granat", and their torpedo tubes are adapted for launching a rocket. The volume of modernization of these boats for the use of the Caliber Caliber would not be large. But for now, it’s only clear that at least a part of these boats will not receive any “Caliber”, and perhaps not even one. This is strange, bad and incomprehensible.

It seemed that the boats of projects 971 and 945A were doomed to be the first to get the "Caliber". but something went wrong ... In the photo - Project 971 PLA Bars

Well, the termination of the 20385 series of corvettes capable of using these weapons is also worth mentioning. From the point of view of restoring anti-submarine forces vital to the Navy, a simplified and cheapened version of such a corvette, considered in the article, would be rational “The light forces of the Navy. Their significance, tasks and ship structure ”. And he would provide the same opportunities for the use of missiles that their placement on large ships gives, adjusted for the worst (but not as bad as that of RTOs) seaworthiness.

An example of what a simplified version of 20385 could be. A radar complex could be taken similar to that installed at Karakurt RTOs - and it would be even better

One way or another, and the choice of which carriers exactly the naval cruise missiles should be placed on should take into account the strengths of the fleet as a type of aircraft - mobility, the ability to long combat duty in remote areas, the possibility of the formation of powerful and dense missile volleys, the ability to immediately launch strike immediately after receiving an order, in the case of submarines - the possibility of a hidden deployment, and striking not just massive, but also extremely sudden for the enemy.

But the tasks of the "missile gunboats" are better to transfer to the ground forces, especially since now there are no political factors holding back this. The idea that if we do not deploy medium- and short-range missiles previously prohibited by the Treaty with the USA in the European part of Russia, then the Americans will not do this, it’s just ridiculous. The Americans will do it anyway, just now they don’t have the right rockets for this yet. As soon as they are in service in more or less massive numbers, some kind of foreign policy provocation will follow, such as the downed Boeing, which will become the reason for the deployment of these weapons in Europe.

Once again, this is absolutely inevitable, it’s just a foregone conclusion, the United States did not arrange dances with a tambourine around the withdrawal from this treaty and did not create new missile weapons now so that it would stand on the North American continent and it would not stand there. So, we can not restrain ourselves especially now.

The missile units of the ground forces are the cheapest and easiest way to strike at a range of one and a half to two thousand kilometers from our borders, and less. And the fleet should use cruise missiles not just to “replace” the ground forces, but using its strengths or in those conditions when army units are not applicable. To do this, he needs the “right” media and there must be a lot of them.

This approach is important for one more reason.

Cruise missiles in the tasks of the Navy

In the event of a war with an enemy with a navy, our fleet will have to support favorable operational mode (link of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation) in designated areas within the time specified by the command. One of the necessary conditions for maintaining a favorable operational regime is the establishment of supremacy at sea in specified areas, at least temporarily. These issues are discussed in more detail in the article. “We are building a fleet. Theory and Purpose ".

One of the conditions necessary to ensure supremacy at sea may be the destruction of the enemy’s naval forces, or the prevention of the use of the naval forces by the enemy.

In the modern world, the naval forces of almost all more or less significant militarily significant countries include aviation, both specialized maritime (anti-submarine, patrol) and others.

In addition, the air forces of many countries, especially island ones, specialize precisely in naval warfare, in strikes on surface targets.

Under such conditions, the Navy needs its own “long arm”, which can be used to strike at the coast from a great distance, without wasting time coordinating such an attack through non-naval headquarters. Under the current command system, this, however, is a priori impossible, since the fleets, except for the North, essentially merged with the military districts, and the commanders of various formations and operational groups of the Navy (for example, a permanent formation of the Navy in the Mediterranean) have almost no KR carriers. Read more about command in the article. “Destroyed management. There is no single command of the fleet for a long time. ”.

If we assume that this problem has been solved, then purely naval tasks for the ships of the armed Kyrgyz Republic become clear, in conditions where the ground forces also have missiles of this range. The fleet should and can use its missiles in the interests of establishing dominance at sea - for striking at the enemy’s naval bases, at its airfields, especially important - in terms of the identified accumulations of anti-submarine aircraft, the destruction of which will be simply critical for our fleet, because our main attack ships are submarines, and for them aviation is a terrible threat.

Such operations will require a large supply of missiles, and powerful and numerous volleys, and early deployment of carriers outside the combat radius of the base attack aircraft, that is, all that the fleet should do.

Final conclusion

Let's summarize. The tasks of strikes against ground targets within the flight range of a cruise missile from the territory of the Russian Federation are best left to the ground forces - this is the cheapest method and it also provides both maximum fire performance and maximum combat stability of missile units.

The fleet needs cruise missiles in large quantities, but they must be used so that the strengths of the fleet as a type of aircraft are used to the maximum extent, and not for the "replacement" of army missile units. The strengths of the fleet are mobility, namely, the ability to make the launch line anywhere far from the territory of the Russian Federation, the ability to provide long-term combat alert forces with missiles at a great distance from the territory of the Russian Federation, the ability to immediately deliver a maximum force rocket attack, the ability to form powerful missile salvos.

During the hypothetical “big” war, minus situations where there is no choice but to use naval missiles instead of or together with army missiles, cruise missiles should be used by the fleet to solve their operational and tactical tasks, as part of the struggle for supremacy at sea. This is much more useful than using up the entire naval supply of missiles for separately insignificant targets, such as a caponier with a fighter plane or a detected stationary radio station of the enemy ground forces.

Such an approach is economically most beneficial for the country, and for the Navy - in terms of its own combat effectiveness. But it requires a sharp increase in the number of CD carriers in the fleet, and it cannot be RTOs due to their extremely limited applicability. In conditions when the country's shipbuilding capabilities are limited, mass equipping of ships and submarines of old projects with Caliber cruise missiles is necessary. Also, when the Navy finally comes to its senses and takes up anti-submarine forces, corvettes or other anti-submarine ships under construction will also have to be able to use cruise missiles, all the more so since it is easily technically feasible. After all, as was said earlier, light forces are not necessarily defensive and not necessarily coastal.

We have to finally start making rational, healthy decisions.

Comments

[Ros 56]

Alexander, we don’t make decisions, we can only express our opinion, and that’s it. This question must be addressed to Shoigu, he is responsible for our defense of the country.

[Grandfather]

Sea power and cruise missiles. How does the fleet use Caliber?

our salvo of "calibers" from all carriers is 120 missiles, the Americans have "axes" - 8000 ... but we have "sea power" ... and questions how to use ...

[timokhin-aa]

A crust on the grain ...
By 2025 there will be Nakhimov and one more Ash, by 2027 from four to six frigates, plus Varshavyanka, plus one or two modernized BODs with 16 cells each, plus it is possible they will modernize some kind of submarine "for Kalbir".
Amers have no more than 4000 Tomahawks in principle.

[Kronos]

It will be ready in theory

[Angry]

All the same it is very, very, little, in order to "frighten and prevent" in peacetime and to "destroy" in wartime. The KR of the Tomahawk and Caliber type is not some kind of miracle weapon, but a modern replica of the V-1, which British fighters shot down in batches back in 45, and after the appearance of American 90 mm anti-aircraft guns with radar fuses, they practically nullified their salvo launch. I don’t know who should be shot for sabotaging the deployment of SLCMs in NPU (inclined launchers), if Uncle Vova didn’t do this, then it’s time for him to retire. Then, if the government worked better, then only on the RK pr.1241 were put on 8 KR, and on the RTOs - 12 KR. And for each EM pr.956 and BOD pr.1155, 12-16 SLCMs could become light instead of Trumpets and Mosquitoes. So it would be possible to obtain, in a few years, up to fifty BNK carriers of SLCM, with a total amount of up to 1000 CR ... Plus submarine forces. And there was no need to spend money on "don't understand what", I'm talking about RTOs carrying as many as 8 SLCMs. It turns out that each cell costs us a billion rubles !!! And RTOs themselves are a burden for the fleet, since there is virtually no anti-aircraft missile defense or air defense, which means that they must be covered with at least corvettes and frigates, which are also "cried by the cat." And who will be responsible for this?

[timokhin-aa]

And who will answer for this?

None. But the question is not that, from the fact that some switches will be punished, nothing will change. It is necessary to correct errors.

[bayard]

Quote: timokhin-aa

Grain chicken ...

This year, two Yasen-M class submarines should be commissioned, each carrying 40 (if Onyx or Zircon) or even 50 (if Caliber) KR. That is, immediately + 80 - 100 KR.
Varshavyanka - from 8 to ... at least 18 (but this is hardly) "Caliber".
"Admiral Kasatonov" - 16 CR.
BOD "Marshal Shaposhnikov" - 16 CR.
I don't know how much the shipbuilding "god" will give, but there should be.
And by the way, the modernization of the Shchuka-B type submarine for carrying the Caliber has begun - the first one has already returned to service.

[timokhin-aa]

With Pikes, it is unclear how many of them are calibrating. There are plans for some ships just to repair them and that's it.

For the rest - somehow it will be so. A little there, a little here.
Korvetov 20385 two pieces still forgot

[Nemchinov Vl]

Quote: bayard

BOD "Marshal Shaposhnikov" - 16 CR.

on the one hand - "YES" !! Sure !! but on the other hand, change the stuffing one thing, but the resource of the power plant ?! He does not renew at the same time !! The industry of the Russian Federation does not produce new ones similar to Ukrainian GTD (for BOD 1155). Center for MARINE gas turbine engine building and gear assembly (like "Zarya-Mashproekt" under the Union), is not being built ?! Well, as an example, "Chabanenko" should be enough for you, and others. "gradually fading BOD 1155 SF" ... So, will it make sense further "modernization following the example of Shaposhnikov" the remaining 1155 ?! And as if Vitaly and I were not sorry, but it is. SW Alexander Timokhin, this problematic aspect in gas turbine engine building (as well as gear manufacturing), for some reason bypasses .... It's a pity ?! everyone understands that engine building "Saturn" is traditionally more preoccupied with the problems of aviation and not the fleet. Therefore, I emphasized above it - Marine !!! Noticed the speed (even planned) transfer to the fleet of the same 22350?! Well, that is, our industry is not able to supply a power plant for a frigate in the VI 5400 tons, based on the calculation of faster than one ship in five (!!) years ... there, according to Vicki, only "Amelko" is designed for 5-5,5 years, and the rest by default, at least 6 years !!! At the same time, the Chinese Navy, rhythmically every four (and sometimes three) years from the laying, receives EM 052 D in VI 7500 tons, and with a power plant, both in terms of power and in principle (CODOG scheme), similar to our 22350 ?! Moreover, it is able to disperse a ship with a larger VI to 30 knots !!! If this goes on and on, then all our shipbuilding programs and their effect will be near zero !!! Without creating a center for marine gas turbine engine building and assembly of gearboxes (like Zarya-Mashproekt), after seven years (that is, by 2027 !!), even The Navy will receive 8 frigates 22350, then by that time all the remaining BOD 1155 will "lay down without engines", and the fleet will remain with a colossal shortage of BNK of the first rank !! Maybe Nakhimov will come to life in seven years, but probably get up from worn out "Peter the Great" and / or "Varyag" (and maybe both) ?!

[bayard]

There was a lot of trouble with the repair of the Shaposhnikov power plant, and some even assumed that it would not work out, but ... we managed it, which means we LEARNED. Therefore, a decision was made on a similar overhaul with the modernization of the rest of the ships of the series. I would like to hope that the repair of subsequent sisterships will go much faster and more fun - all the same it is easier on the knurled one. It is another matter at what capacities they are going to modernize the 1155s, if only at the Vladivostok Shipyard, then they will not have time to do much, but if they take care of this in Severodvinsk, then in two streams, maybe at least some of them (1155) will be extended service. "Shaposhnikov" seems to have been extended for 20 years. But even if it works out for 15 years, it's already good.
By the way, the followers of the modernization of the BOD, instead of the second gun, have the opportunity to place not 2, but 3 UKKS - at 24 KR, as at 22350+ \ 22350.1, which will significantly strengthen the ship.
Regarding the new power plants for frigates, everything will show launching and sea trials. If everything works out, then the rhythmic supply of new power plants with an initial rate of at least 2 sets per year will be ensured. This is also evidenced by the fact that for the second year already two new frigates 22350+ are being laid. But on the way bookmarks and 22350M, presumably next year.
The naval engine building could not be born all at once, with a click, and therefore it took all 5 years (before the delivery of the first set to the customer last year), and the fact that the ship is already being prepared for launching indicates that the installation of the power plant went without special problems and much faster than expected (they were going to launch in the summer, but now they reported that it would be no later than mid-May). It remains to wait for sea trials and it will become completely clear whether the naval engine industry was born in Russia.
I really hope that this will be so, after all, at the two laid UDCs this year, the GEMs will most likely be the same as at 22350.
And the pace of building new ships from then on (when it becomes clear that the power plant is operating normally) will become as expected for 4 - 5 years, depending on the VI (22350 or 22350M). For example, look at the construction time of the previous "Indian" series of frigates - everything is at the level of world standards (in terms of time).
Of course, we are far from the Chinese pace, but we cannot look at the timing of the construction of our ships in the absence of a power plant, when both Ukraine and Germany refused to supply, but their own (what a surprise) did not appear. There were delays due to the unavailability of the air defense system. Now this is in the past - "Polyment-Redut" has been brought to mind and in series, the first domestic power plants were mounted on the ship faster than the allotted time.
No more barriers.

And for good, Russia would return its ancestral lands of Novorossia and Little Russia, and with them Zoryu-Mashproekt, and Nikolaev shipyards, and Yuzhmash with Yuzhnoye design bureau, and Kiev and Kharkov with Antonov design bureau ... fell down.
In 5 years, I hope, all 8 pieces. 22350 will be already in service, part of the BOD (at least a couple more) has been modernized, "Nakhimov will still be out of modernization by 2022/23 and Peter the Great will go for modernization, and Varyag ... The Pacific Fleet is completely exposed), but after a couple of years - for repairs (but of course without modernization) with the extension of service for another 10 years ... and retirement.
Soon it will be more fun.
The coronovirus does not gouge us.

[timokhin-aa]

Don't underestimate the power of public opinion. My first article on "VO" was about the need to slaughter a series of "corvettes" 20386 as ships harmful to the country.
So, they seem to be slaughtered.
And there are rumors that the 20380 series may resume.
But it was just business to give material that a million people would read.

Of course, it’s too early to rejoice, maybe in the end this one drank and pushed on, but the chances of returning common sense are now much higher than two years ago.
Shake necessary, in short.
I have raised this topic with missiles in other publications and will continue to raise it.

[ser56]

Quote: timokhin-aa

And there are rumors that the 20380 series may resume.

at least something...

[timokhin-aa]

This is far from a solid fact. The Pacific Fleet and the NEA jointly extort these corvettes, in Moscow they say that there will be nothing of this, who is an open question.

[ser56]

Quote: timokhin-aa

who is an open question.

and not swing your sword at Shakespeare - more precisely, this question? the last straw ...

[timokhin-aa]

I think so far. It is necessary to enter the info line and get more insiders.

[ser56]

Quote: timokhin-aa

It is necessary to enter the info line and get more insiders.

Yes, but it would be nice to use your (and other) polemical insights in the articles and show a bleak picture of the PLO for the SSBN, especially in connection with the Albatros launch and the extremely controversial project (on seaworthiness and helicopter) to create their replacement based on karakurt .. .
Please do not take it as a lesson ...

[timokhin-aa]

I already wrote about Karakurt - it wouldn’t be so bad that instead of RTOs it would be done as multi-purpose. It would be much better than nothing and in truth, would be faster than with corvettes.
On PLO ships I think how to write.

[ser56]

Quote: timokhin-aa

it wouldn’t be so bad that instead of RTOs it would be made as multi-purpose.

not really - everything needs to be redesigned and you get a corvette ... why one more - a little zoo? Yes, and the displacement for the SF and Pacific Fleet is not enough ... And what kind of PLO without a helicopter? If you make a series of 20 -25 keels, then the price will drop sharply

[Cyril G ...]

There is reason to believe that if you don’t pick the ship completely, but confine it to screwing GAS Ekhoopisk and Vignette light and adding 4-6 TPK of the Package, it is quite possible to meet the increase in / and by 50 tons and the minimum price increase.

[Nemchinov Vl]

Quote: timokhin-aa

The Pacific Fleet and the NEA jointly extort these corvettes, in Moscow they say that there will be nothing of this, who is an open question.

Well, for now, a couple of corvettes 20380 would not hurt the Pacific Fleet at the ASZ (in the form of 20385 is preferable (!) ..) until they decide on the power plant, and the layout and composition of weapons for 11664 for PLO. And then, I hope 11664 will displace 20380 completely. If they mastered 16SD-500, and made a "quadruple power plant" of them (by analogy with 20380), then VI and dimensions (lengthened to 124 meters) would make it possible to make even a worthy replacement of 11664 R / M out of 11356, with VI about 2700 -3000 t., And 16 VPU UKSK (from the word -Easy) !!!

[Cyril G ...]

The TOFu will not interfere with the emergency of at least 8 ships. 4 to Vladik, and 4 to Kamchatka.

[Chaldon48]

Something I have little idea of ​​the small missile ship's march to the South Atlantic, except perhaps inside someone of a distant dock ship.

[timokhin-aa]

So I write about the fact that they are not needed. This boat cannot go to the South Atlantic, in any way.
But the frigate or the destroyer - quite. And the atomic submarine - completely.

Therefore, we must put everything upside down.

[Boa kaa]

Quote: timokhin-aa

they are not needed. This boat cannot go to the South Atlantic, in any way.

Alexander,
1. If RTOs were not needed, they would not be built. They have a different task than their "big" brothers. MRK is the protection and defense of BMZ. And the fact that they are used against the coast is because of our "land" poverty and the lack of the Army's forces.
When the Baltic turned out to be bare ass, having no (!) NK with KR-RCC, it was necessary, to protect Len.VMB, to overtake 2 RTOs with the Black Sea Fleet. Or have you forgotten this already?
2. RTOs at one time from the Black Sea dragged (walked) on a backstop to a BS in Middle-earth. And now we have Tartus - God himself ordered.
3. Stealth and speed of movement make these small ships "stilettos" in the skillful hands of an experienced and cunning naval commander.
Therefore, not everything is as obvious as lying on the surface.

[timokhin-aa]

1. Well, how can they protect something, please explain to me?
2. These are peacetime tricks, will one submarine kill so many RTOs? how many torpedoes she has.
3. They are not subtle and the speed at the transition there is small. Buyan-M has a maximum of 26 knots. What speed moves are you talking about?

[Boa kaa]

1. RTOs, as the RCC platform, may well be a threat to any NK within the reach of their weapons. Therefore, in Kronstadt, and based on "Green Dol" and "Serpukhov," although they are included in 36 BrRKA.
2. It is unlikely that the submarine will hunt for RTOs. Their goals are larger than 800 tons of iron.
3. But besides "Buyanov-M" there is also pr. 1239 t. "Samum" with 55 knots. Who prevents (in the future) from putting on them inclined launchers for 3M-54? Or does the Koran not allow it?
Well, since you want to talk, let me a few words on the article:
1. On the role of the Navy in the armed struggle of the future.
You are considering this issue from the Yankees' position on the concept of "Fleet against Shore". We have only RPKSN and APKR-KRBD against the coast with appropriate weapons. Yes, to demonstrate their capabilities, they showed that RTOs with DPLs can dodge and hit targets in the depths of the adversary's territory (1600-2500 km) with Caliber (3M14).
Our concept for general-purpose forces (which includes MRKs) is "Fleet against ships and against naval bases." Maximum - BC at a distance of 100-150 km from the water's edge. At the same time, in terms of infrastructure - only SBP, well, if radar-contrast targets (such as oil storage facilities) - then the anti-ship missile system will do. The rest is BRAV and RV Land, plus Aviation ...
2. As for the cost of RTOs and the Caliber division.
Colleague jonht (Eugene) Today, 10:22 wrote. I plus him, because I completely agree. I will not repeat myself.
3. Maybe they heard something about universal supply ships, RTB, weapons ships, spare supply areas and replenishment. So, if there is a pier and you can approach it, then in 2 hours the RTO will be able to go back to sea with full BC. Therefore, it is not a fact that they are disposable.
4. Incorrect comparison of RTOs with Frigates.
They have different purposes and tasks to be solved, database areas. But even outside the coastal air defense zone, RTOs can operate as part of the KPUG under the cover of ships carrying "group" air defense systems. (In the navy, they are called "air defense systems of the middle-far zone").
5. On the rearmament of all "old" boats and ships on 3M-14 / 3M-54.
About this casually mentioned Sergey 777 (Dr. No) Today, 10:28, in the light of the fact that "there will not be enough Calibers for all." It seems to me that the problem is different: cost / efficiency (!) And the "life cycle" of old ships is not unlimited. New, special construction to-li, will be cheaper, more durable and more efficient, with a modernization base for 3M22.

And so I thank you at least for paying attention to the Fleet. And they will always be controversial moments. For each gopher imagines himself an agronomist (seeing the battle from the side and not having served for a day in the Navy)
Good luck and health!

[timokhin-aa]

1. RTOs, as the RCC platform, may well be a threat to any NK within the reach of their weapons.

Adjusted for:

1. Obsolescence of enemy data - the same LCS has 44 or 47 nodes, depending on the type of ship. Leave the GOS sector and all, and there are only 3M54 anti-ship missiles, Onyxes do not fly from them.
2. The presence of an external control unit, because the buoys themselves can’t aim - there is no possibility at the hardware level, EDC can be considered only on the tablet on the calculator. With the corresponding error.

2. It is unlikely that the submarine will hunt for RTOs. Their goals are larger than 800 tons of iron.

Well, firstly, not 800 tons of iron, but the potential presence of 8 subtle CRs with UBF. I think that they will be thrown at them before the official start of the conflict. outfit of forces for destruction. The goal and toothless and immobile and dangerous at the same time - such do not live long.

On the other hand, you are a Polish submariner, you have a 877 diesel-electric submarine and the task of mining the Gulf of Finland, there are 6 cool torpedoes with TU, just in case, and specially installed lithium-ion batteries for this.
And now you go to the mining.

How can RTOs stop you? No way.
A submarine with mines is a much more likely threat than a bulk of surface ships.

Our concept for general-purpose forces (to which MRKs belong) is "Fleet against ships and against naval bases."

Well, what am I writing about? Not a fleet against the coast at all, but against a naval base. For what are CR needed. What are you going to beat on the Navy?

Maybe they heard something about universal supply ships, RTB, weapons ships, spare supply areas and replenishment.

I heard, but you try to lower the rocket into the cell at sea. So far, no one has succeeded. Have you heard about the story of folding cranes on the MK41?

4. Incorrect comparison of RTOs with Frigates.
They have different purposes and tasks to be solved, database areas.

Comparison is within the framework of solving one problem - the strike by cruise missiles along the coast. And practice confirms the legitimacy of such a comparison - the strike of the Kyrgyz Republic on the coast is the only real combat task that was set for frigates and RTOs and was solved with the use of weapons. So why not compare?
The money is the same goes to RTOs and frigates.

cost / efficiency (!) And the "life cycle" of old ships is not unlimited. New, special construction to-li, will be cheaper, more durable and more efficient, with a modernization base for 3M22.

And where are they, new ships? No choice.

[Boa kaa]

Quote: timokhin-aa

the same LCS has 44 or 47 knots, depending on the type of ship.

RTOs do not go so far as to sink literary products off the US coast. RTOs defend their BMZ from enemy invasion. This is the issue of the combat use of RTOs

Quote: timokhin-aa

The presence of an external control unit,

Yes there is it. Even UAVs of the "Altius-RU" type already have a 2-way closed communication with the satellite and control system. And the Navy has already ordered these UAVs.

Quote: timokhin-aa

the potential presence of 8 subtle KR with UC. I think that they will be thrown at them before the official start of the conflict. outfit of forces for destruction. The goal and toothless and immobile and dangerous at the same time - such do not live long.

1. Alexander, it’s immediately clear that you did not deal with SBN and loading units.
2. Special forces will be thrown primarily on larger carriers, starting with APRK and rpkSN and ending with RKR-am with FR and Corv. And RTOs and other trifles will be caught according to the residual principle.
3. I am seriously "puzzled" by your characteristics of this class of ships!

Quote: timokhin-aa

You are a Polish submariner, you have a diesel submarine 877 and the task of mining the Gulf of Finland,

1. I am a SOVIET submariner! And I won’t become any other.
2. The lords "Orzhel" are not in service after the fire. Cobens are laid-back, they don't go to sea. They are going to buy A-19 missiles from the Swedes, but so far the "penyenzev" is dumb, (you need $ 4 billion for 2,4 units)
3. The RP fleet has no tasks to block the Gulf of Finland. After the Germans left for the North Sea, they were responsible for the blockade of the Baltic Straits in order to prohibit the entry of BF ships to the Faroe-Icelandic border and the fight against NK in the pre-strait zone.

Quote: timokhin-aa

installed lithium-ion batteries.
And then you go to mining. How can an RTO stop you?

Poland can’t afford it. Li-I sources are only among dzhapanov and then in a single copy on the 11th building of Soryu.

Quote: timokhin-aa

Not a fleet against the coast at all, but against a naval base. For what are CR needed. What are you going to beat on the Navy?

1. Caspians have shown that it is possible not only for the naval base.
2. Before the appearance of the CRBD, torpedoes with SBP were very wow.

Quote: timokhin-aa

You try to lower the rocket into the cell at sea. So far, no one has succeeded.

Why at sea? It is possible in PMB, at the pier / floating pier and even with a truck crane. We did it in due time. And nothing, no one complained ...

Quote: timokhin-aa

the strike of the Kyrgyz Republic on the coast is the only real combat mission that was set for frigates and RTOs and was solved using weapons.

What are you saying? For general forces, the main task of NK / PL in the sea. And on the naval base mainly RV and Av work.

Quote: timokhin-aa

And where are they, new ships?

On the way. 24.04.2020/6/XNUMX there will be XNUMX more units for the Navy to lay. We will be alive - we will not die!

[timokhin-aa]

RTOs do not go so far as to sink literary products off the US coast.

And where did you get the idea that littoral products would be off the coast of the USA? Do you think they were made to defend the shores of the United States?

RTOs defend their BMZ from enemy invasion. This is the issue of the combat use of RTOs

I repeat to you - the main threat in the BMZ is submarines, aircraft and every little thing from missile boats to LCS. How can RTOs protect against this?

Yes there is it. Even UAVs of the "Altius-RU" type already have a 2-way closed communication with the satellite and control system. And the Navy has already ordered these UAVs.

Well, the RTOs will have to wait for the data from these UAVs to arrive on some KP or headquarters ship and from there already in the form of a control center on the RTOs - even if the uel is within the radio horizon. For Buiks, this is exactly so.
And if the wind is over the runway?

1. Alexander, it’s immediately clear that you did not deal with SBN and loading units.
2. Special forces will be thrown primarily on larger carriers, starting with APRK and rpkSN and ending with RKR-am with FR and Corv. And RTOs and other trifles will be caught according to the residual principle.

In the Baltic theater, too?
You do not think for the enemy.

3. The RP fleet has no tasks to block the Gulf of Finland. After the Germans left for the North Sea, they were responsible for the blockade of the Baltic Straits in order to prohibit the entry of BF ships to the Faroe-Icelandic border and the fight against NK in the pre-strait zone.

Tasks may change, the question is about opportunities

Poland can’t afford it. Li-I sources are only among dzhapanov and then in a single copy on the 11th building of Soryu.

Well, it will be necessary - the American comrades will pay. On the other hand, even if they don’t pay, this does not cancel the underwater threat, as well as the fact that this is the BASIC threat.
And what about the RTOs?

Why at sea? It is possible in PMB, at the pier / floating pier and even with a truck crane. We did it in due time. And nothing, no one complained

Well, what about the article? Have you read it? It’s much easier to do all this on ground installations than to mess with RTOs and constant returns to the base.

What are you saying? For general forces, the main task of NK / PL in the sea. And on the naval base mainly RV and Av work.

You thought somewhere away from the article floated away. Look again, what idea is voiced there.

On the way. 24.04.2020/6/XNUMX there will be XNUMX more units for the Navy to lay. We will be alive - we will not die!

Two Ash and two frigates. And Ash is not a fact that with the eliminated jambs. Do the suppliers know what they said about "Kazan"? "This disabled person."
But this is already a new project, which seems to be without the disadvantages of Severodvinsk.
And they will be built for many years, during which time much more ships will be withdrawn from service, because ship repair does not really work for us and the modernization of existing units is almost not carried out.
What the article explicitly says.
Well, two UDC, with which everything is very muddy

[Boa kaa]

Quote: timokhin-aa

And where did you get that

Of the purpose of these ships.

How can RTOs protect against this?

Es-no cash weapons. As it was in the incident with the Georgians.

Well, MRC and have to wait

You have a misconception about the modern power management system. NK is not a boat. Space is nearby! over your head. And all this is online.

You do not think for the enemy.

Never! But nobody canceled the intelligence sources, so, call me ... what are you rich in.

Tasks may change, the question is about opportunities

And that's what I mean. Only "stretch (set) legs (tasks) according to clothes (opportunities)". Otherwise, the cart is in front of the horse. My counterparts are not involved in Manilov. Not their profile!

this does not cancel the underwater threat, as well as the fact that this is the main threat.

It depends on which MTVD. For the "small" ones, the main threat is the anti-ship missiles. In the Baltic - Rka and Av.

the thought floated away from the article ... what idea was voiced there.

It happens to you. For example, when you began to get out about the SBP on the "fry" 8 vigorous mallets were loaded ...
According to your persistent appeal to the article, I had to read it carefully again. She is not perfect. But here with what I can not agree:
1. Despite the name, more than half of the material on shore installations. And out of 11 photos, only 4 and 1 plot are dedicated to the fleet.
2. A lot of liberties and reservations, such as army ships (228000, to push back the launch line of the CD (later, however, they corrected themselves and began to put it forward), "Cruise missiles in the Navy's backs" (?) In fact, the tasks are set by FORCES, not the means of reference armed struggle.
3. You are absolutely not familiar with the "Basics of preparation and conduct of operations ..." (it was not "given" to everyone, but still ...) From here you get ridiculous things like:
- a strike at the BC by the forces of the fleet in its own interests, without coordinating actions with other coastal headquarters ..
The zeal is understandable, but only fleets in coastal areas will act in the interests of the Fronts and, as a rule, according to the plans of the First Operation or according to the tasks set by the Headquarters of the Front (now operational direction).
4. The assertion that the S-marine OS has almost no CR (?), You know, doesn’t have a permanent composition of ships either!
But, for example, 1144.2 and a couple of 22350M will "arrive" in Mediterranean, and under water the 949MA will wag its tail - and the missiles will immediately ... be enough. So - not a fact!
5. As a naval person, I do not advise you to "push as far as you like" the forces of the fleet (ships) without ensuring their combat stability. Even 955A and 885M, I would have saved from your rash step. AHA.
And nothing, you can read and argue. For which, undoubtedly, thank you from the public.

[timokhin-aa]

Of the purpose of these ships.

They had a different purpose and now have it.

Es-no cash weapons. As it was in the incident with the Georgians.

In that situation, Buik would have failed - there is nowhere to take control center. MRK 1234 is still an arc ship according to REV capabilities. But even if the buoy was given to the control center, then let's remember that the Georgian boat turned out to be too small a target, the anti-ship missile missile system missed and was finished off by the Osa air defense missile system. Does Buyan-M have an air defense missile system (we don’t consider flexible)?

You have a misconception about the modern power management system. NK is not a boat. Space is nearby! over your head. And all this is online.

This series was smooth on paper. Does the EDC satellite count you? Does he distinguish a false target from a ship?

For the "small" ones, the main threat is the anti-ship missiles. In the Baltic - Rka and Av.

Once again, you conjecture for the enemy.

It happens to you. For example, when you began to get out about the SBP on the "fry" 8 vigorous mallets were loaded ...

And what is stopping you? Nothing. As a result, the enemy will proactively resolve this issue. So your thesis that RTOs is supposedly an uninteresting goal is very far from reality.
This is a defenseless goal, if we talk about Buyan-M. But quite interesting.

3. You are absolutely not familiar with the "Basics of preparation and conduct of operations ..." (it was not "given" to everyone, but still ...) From here you get ridiculous things like:
- a strike at the BC by the forces of the fleet in its own interests, without coordinating actions with other coastal headquarters ..
The zeal is understandable, but only fleets in coastal areas will act in the interests of the Fronts and, as a rule, according to the plans of the First Operation or according to the tasks set by the Headquarters of the Front (now operational direction).

What is the habit of reducing the infinite variety of potential conflicts of the future to ensure the flank of the army? Do you think that if there is a war, then only against the United States and NATO, and only in neighboring countries? Not even close.

4. The assertion that the S-marine OS has almost no CR (?), You know, doesn’t have a permanent composition of ships either!

The question is that now for such connections of normal ships with the Kyrgyz Republic it’s not even possible to dial them, count them in the ranks on the fingers. In addition to RTOs, which can be used only if the enemy does not show resistance.

5. As a naval person, I do not advise you to "push as far as you like" the forces of the fleet (ships) without ensuring their combat stability.

Did I offer this?

[LeonidL]

"You are considering this issue from the Yankees' position on the concept of "Fleet against shore"." - And from what point of view can Mr. Timokhin consider the issues of the Russian Navy?
"For each gopher imagines himself an agronomist (seeing the battle from the side and not having served for a day in the Navy)"- An excellent characteristic of Mr. Timokhin and his creations!
"Don't underestimate the power of public opinion. My first article on "VO" was about the need to slaughter a series of "corvettes" 20386 as ships harmful to the country.
So, they seem to be slaughtered.
And there are rumors that the 20380 series may resume.
But it was just business to give material that will read million people. "- Well, just a Napoleon pen, this Mr. Timokhin, a sort of hero-inspector according to Gogol! Timokhin decided to stab him - that means to the morgue! Dearest Mr. Timokhin, where does a million come from? Who reads you outside of" VO "?
The idea of ​​the article is again simple and it smells - the MO is a bunch of dullards, the poor naval authorities fell under it, and only Mr. Timokhin and his Canadian well-wishers know how to turn the true poor Russian fleet on the path. First, to break the entire planned program, to destroy the budget, then to start from scratch something that you consider necessary a layman and layman who has not served anywhere, is not an officer, has no education, the great and all-knowing Mr. Timokhin? A sort of Navalny from military and naval affairs, headed by the "public", led by the townsfolk and activists, dropouts and laboratory assistants, failed and unsuccessful. Should this public solve the problems of the Army and the Navy?

[LeonidL]

Dull Mr. Timokhin, when insulted, is not capable of doing something original on his own. Where does such a writer's ardor, such a rate of fire come from? On April 13, an article "Educational program" trying to heal Beriev's company. Before that, an article against ekranoplanes, in just two years 118 articles, all of the type "Collapse of the Russian Navy" - 2018 are here and about the fact that you need to build aircraft carriers, no further - you need cruisers, ... no need a lot of small things, about airplanes, about ICE, about torpedoes. And everything seems solid, everything is illustrated with pictures, especially full - the achievements of the fleets of other cities and then the screams about the lag of the Russian fleet by "generations". There are imperative instructions on how to manage the Fleet correctly, and without Mr. Timokhin, it is being managed incorrectly. Those who really wrote not science-like, but really scientific articles know that it is impossible to pick up material and write a full-fledged article for the period from April 13 to April 14. Any normal person will understand that it is also impossible to be even an "expert" in all those areas where Mr. Timokhin worked in the field of the pointing finger. Conclusion - someone throws him material in which Mr. Timokhin weaves his unspilled bile of insolvency, works for a small share. Mr. Timokhin himself is very fond of using English words on an automatic machine (look at the comments to the articles - for example, "good" about Canadian seaplanes), Mr. Timokhin himself admitted that his friends call him Mr., and moreover, Sir ... are also disinterested well-wishers of the Russian Federation? I remind you - Mr. Timokhin is an amateur, he was never a naval officer (and indeed an officer in general), he has no military education. The style of Mr. Timokhin, appeals to the "public", attacks on the leadership of the country and the Ministry of Defense, like tracing papers with the screams of Navalno-disastrous and other pets of old Soros. Therefore, do not take it seriously and do not fall for Mr. Timokhin's cries. Mr. Timokhin himself is sad, ridiculous and pathetic, but he harms one of the foundations of the world order - Russia, which is worth his calls to mine the Baltic, seize Northern Norway, Spitsbergen ... strategic line of preventing a world conflict, and not winning a certain naval battle to obtain delusional "domination at sea" declared by Mr. Timokhin. Bulk's cries, as well as Timokhin's writings, threaten a peaceful existence. This is dangerous.

[timokhin-aa]

I did not insult you LeonidL. I just wrote that you are sick - because you are really sick.

For all those who do not know what LeonidL is:

https://topwar.ru/165946-avianosnyj-vopros-pozhar-na-kuznecove-i-vozmozhnoe-buduschee-avianoscev-v-rf.html#comment-id-9963925

и

https://topwar.ru/165313-fregat-perri-kak-urok-dlja-rossii-sproektirovannyj-mashinoj-massovyj-i-deshevyj.html#comment-id-9923471

do not succumb to the provocation of Leonidle.

[LeonidL]

Oh dear Mr. Timokhin! You are also the dohtur in the field of all branches of medicine! Write an article pzhalust criticizing the actions of the authorities during the pandomy. Well, as you instituted - in the first lines a hymn to Western experience, in the end spitting Russian.

[Fizik M]

Quote: LeonidL

also dohtur in the field of all branches of medicine

everything is much simpler
as they say - YOU have "brilliant green on your forehead about it"

Quote: LeonidL

at the end of spitting Russian.

ohhh how
and let LeonidLo you wipe up ... and if you please write something about "advanced Russian experience"
As they say - we are waiting, "sing the bird, do not be ashamed"
As Tsar Peter used to say - "so that everyone's stupidity would be better known" - so let's compare the stupidity of you and Timokhin

[LeonidL]

Your logic is amazing "You are sick - because you are really sick." !!! Is it like "teaching is right because it is right"? And why would you Mr. Timokhin take offense at me? What did I write wrong, besides your own personal statements, achievements and statements? Why blame the mirror? It reflects an objective physiognomy in a mirror.

[timokhin-aa]

Your logic is shocking "You are sick - because you are really sick.

Well, everything is obvious with you, here you need to be a doctor only to make an accurate diagnosis, and a deviation from the norm in itself is obvious to anyone who follows the links and reads what you said to yourself there.

By the way, how did you get into the nobility? Do you still have to go with the Stalin decree?

[Fizik M]

Quote: LeonidL

Your logic is amazing "You are sick - because you are really sick." !!!

well, YOUR obvious "memory gaps" and absolutely insane "logic", this is an objective fact = diagnosis

[Fizik M]

Quote: LeonidL

hello Beriev's company.

YOU absolutely ?
Are the pills over? Volunteers did not bring?
What a nafig "cracking" if Beriev has a "super order" for A100?!?!

Quote: LeonidL

it is not managed correctly

it is not controlled because this management is ruined
and there are speeches by caring admirals of the USSR Navy that are completely identical to Timokhin’s article on the ruined command of the Navy

Quote: LeonidL

and really scientific articles

LeonidLo, VO is not an academic publication
What course did YOU study in? by the way, don't "shake the audience" a list of YOUR "VAKovskys" publications?

Quote: LeonidL

I remind you that Mr. Timokhin is an amateur, he has never been a naval officer (and indeed an officer in general), he has no military education.

Let me remind you that the biggest success of the Russian Navy was due to amateur G. Orlov

Quote: LeonidL

it harms one of the pillars of the world order - Russia

Yeah
pulling out "under the spotlights" of the doubts of stupid and fraudulent Leonidlov, sucking naval loot

Quote: LeonidL

The leadership of Russia in the policy of armaments, the formation of military and naval doctrine goes along a strategic line .... not winning some naval battle

Why LeonidLo, gloriously YOU "took off your pants" yourself!

[Fizik M]

Quote: LeonidL

Dearest Mr. Timokhin, where does a million come from? Who reads you outside of "VO"?

be afraid Leonidlo, they even read it, including in MO
and in the "village of Konashi" they react very sharply

Quote: LeonidL

The idea of ​​the article is again simple and smells

YOURs just smell, Monsieur DeonidLo stupid and rash discharge

Quote: LeonidL

A sort of Bulk

have YOU pills run out? Soros again in wet fantasies crumple?

[Cyril G ...]

2. It is unlikely that the submarine will hunt for RTOs. Their goals are larger than 800 tons of iron.

Will be. For the goal is defenseless and tasty, while due to the presence of the cbrcd it is quite dangerous. Therefore Adyn shot - a corpse.

[Amateur]

Since then, before going anywhere, I look in the newspaper to see if some stain has appeared again. As soon as a spot appears - "I say goodbye, my angel, with you", I don't go anywhere and wait. When the Montpeleys volcano destroyed the whole island of Martinique, a professor wrote in National Politics that he had long warned readers about a large sunspot. And "National Policy" was not delivered to this island on time. So they thundered! (The adventures of the brave soldier Schweik ...)

How to make it so that the opuses of Mr. Timokhin must be read in the Ministry of Defense and the General Staff. And then they will "thunder" like the island of Martinique.

[Fizik M]

Quote: Amateur

Timokhin read without fail in the Moscow Region

short - read
and read highly

[LeonidL]

Gogol wrote "the auditor" long ago!

[Fizik M]

Quote: LeonidL

Gogol has long been

for YOU Gogol it's too complicated
start with at least K. Chukovsky

[rocket757]

Interesting coverage of the topic.
Such an aspect as the effective use of missile systems taking into account the price / efficiency indicator is always important when it is necessary to choose options, correlating all this with your capabilities.
The military power of a state is always expensive, very expensive. There is a desire to see that our leadership does not say goodbye at such a crucial, difficult moment.

[Luty]

MRK 21631 is a very expensive car. But in fact, a hybrid of a small artillery ship with a missile. 100 mm AU for such a ship is redundant. But you should not risk shooting such a unit along the shore. Yes, and the IAC of project 21630, built in three units, is far from the most successful solution. But 22800 is already somewhat better and cheaper. I was always impressed with the ability of Zelenodolsk guys to push their products. From project 11540 to the present day.

[Nemchinov Vl]

Quote: Luty

I was always impressed by the ability of Zelenodolsk guys to push their products.

?! Here's how ?! But it always seemed to me that using your "metropolitan administrative resources", just Severnoye PKB and "Almaz", more often pushed their own, far from always and in all the best (than Zelenodolsk PKB) projects. As an example 20380/86 and 11664? !!

[Luty]

Count the number of units built according to the Zelenodoltsev project and the Northern Design Bureau project. The Hindus and others were actively offered 11540, but they are ordering 11356 renaciations. The 1166 project is an enlarged 1124 and significantly inferior to 20380. The Vietnamese chose it on the basis of price. But without a stationary hangar it is very weak and there is no towed GAS.

[Nemchinov Vl]

Quote: Luty

Project 1166 is an enlarged 1124 and significantly inferior to 20380.

Unfortunately no. What was released for its Navy (from 11661), and was cut back during construction, is simply an RTO (without ASG) .. That's why it is inferior.

Quote: Luty

The Vietnamese chose it on the basis of price. But without a stationary hangar, it is very weak and there is no towed GAS.

The Vietnamese chose him, in the PLO version, absolutely reasonable (!), in terms of price / quality ratio !! PLO capabilities 20380, if higher (Vietnamese version 11661), in terms of detection of submarines, which in itself is rather doubtful, then in terms of the ability to effectively deal with submarines (at a torpedo salvo distance ... 20-45 km.), - absolutely "toothless" (!). In turn, the 11664 (at 16 UVP UKKS) for PLO, in the presence of the same GAS "Zarya-2" (as on 20380), it will be several times more effective, and if it is with "Calm-1", instead of "Reduta", (and "Positive" instead of "Barrier") , it will not be more expensive, but rather the opposite - cheaper !!!

Quote: Luty

But without a stationary hangar, this is very weak.

Not having a hangar helps fight with enemy boats ....

[Luty]

What PLO weapons are on the Vietnamese frigate? 11664 - this is from the category of a beautiful modelka.And you believe that you can shove Calm and 16 calibers. Then what the hell to build new frigates. If the guys from Zelenodolsk solve all the problems cheaply and cheerfully. And habitability with such a displacement and armament and energy means for radar operation, etc. ? The frigates built for the Caspian are the only reasonable option not to cut almost ready ships. Although it was better to finish them and send them to where the PLO forces are needed. Without a stationary helicopter, it is not possible to fight submarines.

[Vladimir_2U]

An interesting article, quite reasoned, thanks.

Even if all Turkish aviation was busy fighting the Russian Air Force and the Syrian Air Force on two fronts - in Syria itself and over the Black Sea, the Turks would still have enough ships and submarines to destroy our weak group without their planes.

And here it would be simply invaluable to support heavy attack ekranoplanes, like "Lunya", with 6 or more heavy anti-ship missiles, which are hardly vulnerable to enemy anti-ship missiles and even more torpedoes, taking into account weather conditions, of course.

[Zlat070]

It was said here that RTOs are expensive. And imagine how much the ekranoplanes will cost (if you take into account the cost of R&D, a production plant, personnel training, etc.)? Moreover, the seriality of these devices will be small, and the conditions for combat use are limited!

[Vladimir_2U]

Military equipment is generally expensive, but the small vulnerability of electronic warheads from anti-ship missiles compared to RTOs can pay off all investments. And heavy ES is also well protected from airborne weapons, compared to aircraft of comparable mass.

[timokhin-aa]

What is there to represent? OCD + lead ekranoplan + restoration of equipment and production capacity = 100 billion rubles and 10 years of time.

Imagine how many Su-30SMs with Onyx can be bought for $ 100 billion.

But the opponent will not hear you.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: timokhin-aa

OCD + lead ekranoplan + restoration of equipment and production capacity = 100 billion rubles and 10 years of time.

Where does the data come from? The same Lun is already in the metal, there are no drawings, there is reverse engineering, if everything is completely sad in the Russian SHIPBUILDING. I mean, the Soviet heavy EP were built at shipyards using hydrofoil technology.

[ser56]

Quote: timokhin-aa

how many Su-30SMs with Onyxes can be bought for 100 billion.

a couple of divisions ...

[timokhin-aa]

This is not for me, but in the "Church of the Ekranoplan of the last days".

[Vladimir_2U]

And where did you get the idea that I am "Witness ekranoplan"? ))) It's just that your dislike for EP is irrational and the arguments against them are weak, it seems to me.

[timokhin-aa]

Answer the question - what to spend 100 yards on - for 50 Su-30SM units modernized for Onyx and Zircon or the ability to build ekranoplans and one prototype?

It’s very simple.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: timokhin-aa

Answer the question - what to spend 100 yards on for 50 Su-30SM units

Right now, the answer is obvious - to planes and missiles. But also answer you to my question - where does the figure of 100 billion come from? You prompted another argument for the EP, thanks, the production of EP does not distract the power for the production of aircraft, and the power to build large ships. But RTOs of that: Bolivar will not take two out))).

[timokhin-aa]

Well, the PAK FA program stood at 60 billion excluding:

- the cost of scientific and technical groundwork for the programs "Fighter of the 90s" (still Soviet)
- S-47 "Berkut"
- All research and development work that was funded not by the Moscow Region, but by the Ministry of Industry and Trade.
- A new generation of weapons for the aircraft.

And it still goes and it is not known exactly when in the end the final frozen look of a production aircraft with a standard engine will turn out.

And then the ekranoplan. This is a whole industry to raise. For example, he needs special engines - the NK-87 has not been done for a long time.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: timokhin-aa

Well, the PAK FA program stood at 60 billion

A completely incorrect comparison, and here's why:
R&D on the Moon has been carried out, technologies have been developed (were);
the main weapons of Lun are ship-based missiles, without special revision, and modified ship-borne launchers. In fact, the weapon Lunya is a constructor from ready-made waste elements
It is not necessary to raise the whole industry, Lunya and Orlyat were built and planned to be mass-built at shipyards, using SPK technologies, SPK production was ALREADY resumed.

[timokhin-aa]

A completely incorrect comparison, and here's why:
R&D on the Moon has been carried out, technologies have been developed (were);

And those alloys from which the Moon set was made, steel grades and GOSTs are preserved? Or are they different now? And without exception, relays, cables, buttons, toggle switches, devices, CRT screens?

For your information, in order to restart the production of IL-76 it had to be designed again, this is not an exaggeration, there was a reverse engineering of the Soviet project. He even had another index - IL-476 at first, then it was returned to 76.
You just have a childish idea of ​​the question.
Trite other rockets (Lun had Mosquitoes) would already require a FULL revision of the project.
There are no engines for him, new ones have to be made, allies from the times of the USSR fell off, etc.

Return to reality, please.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: timokhin-aa

He even had another index - IL-476 at first, then it was returned later 76

You stubbornly consider Lun a bad plane, and this is a bad ship in some aspects. )))

Quote: Vladimir_2U

It is not necessary to raise the whole industry, Lunya and Orlyat were built and planned to be mass-built at shipyards, using SPK technologies, SPK production was ALREADY resumed.

[timokhin-aa]

You stubbornly consider Lun a bad plane, and this is a bad ship in some aspects. )))

Yes, even a UFO. The project needs to be done in a new way, equipment for the changed design is needed, a complete list of allies, new engines, a complete list of allies for engines.

Well and yes, this is a ship without the advantages of a ship.

[garri-lin]

Wing is by no means a ship. This seaplane is limited in vertical maneuver. And the misfortune of ekranoplanes and the USSR was just what many considered them ships. The development of radar has killed their advantages in speed. If they are very busy and make an ekranoplan according to the scheme of a flying wing and as inconspicuous as possible, then they will have a beggar. But not the drummers. Only this economic is not profitable.

[timokhin-aa]

Well said.

[garri-lin]

I love ekranoplans. From the moment I found out about them in the early 90s. I would like their production and use to resume. And it is in the military sphere. But I understand that this will be something from the area of ​​diesel engine. And no one will do it.

[Fizik M]

perhaps ES has an actual niche, but this is a very specific niche of efficiency, and most importantly, ALL attempts on this part are past it

[timokhin-aa]

Disposable UAV on screen effect

I remember in a dialogue a comrade from 1 Central Research Institute (is he from there, yes?) I discussed with him the topic of low-speed stealth-RCC optimized so that the GOS coming from above the missiles could not be caught on the background of the underlying surface, the secrecy of which would be caused by low speed and near-zero (due to the low speed) the influence of the Prandtl-Gloert effect.

He could not argue. This is so, by the way.

[Fizik M]

Quote: timokhin-aa

Disposable UAV on screen effect

Not only

[Fizik M]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

SPK production ALREADY resumed.

on owls backlog
and not the best
but in the SPK it makes sense, but the EP - it makes sense only in the completion of the "Rescuer" as a rescuer for the Pacific Fleet

[Svateev]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

"in Syria"
And here it would be simply invaluable to support heavy impact ekranoplanes, like "Lunya", with 6 or more heavy anti-ship missiles

And how does the ekranoplan from the Black Sea get into the eastern Mediterranean?
In general, an ekranoplan is an under-ship (in range and depending on weather) and an under-plane (in speed). The methods of its combat use are doubtful.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Svateev

And how does the ekranoplan from the Black Sea get into the eastern Mediterranean?

That's strange, but how do all the ships of the Russian Navy get from the Black Sea to the Mediterranean? The bosporus. Plus, you did not notice something from the article:

in Syria itself and over the Black Sea, the Turks would still have enough ships and submarines to destroy our weak group without their aircraft.

Quote: Svateev

The methods of its combat use are doubtful.

The elementary tactics of the interaction of the naval group with the EP directly begs. Rendezvous with a squadron, refueling (if you still need to), and a sudden blow to external target designation. Let me remind you that the maximum size of the Black Sea is not more than 1200 km.

[timokhin-aa]

You just can not imagine the subject of discussion, in general. That is, behind your words, when you print them, there is no visual picture. You do not understand what you write.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: timokhin-aa

You do not understand what you write.

Possible.
But in the hypothetical situation you described:

Even if all Turkish aviation was busy fighting the Russian Air Force and the Syrian Air Force on two fronts - in Syria itself and over the Black Sea, the Turks would still have enough ships and submarines to destroy our weak group without their planes.

Even without taking into account the low efficiency of the "air-to-air" missile launcher on the heavy aircraft "Lun" (I am deliberately taking into account the outdated machine), we will accept your condition: there are no combat aircraft on both sides in the air. And here, a high-speed car, hardly vulnerable to anti-ship missiles and invulnerable to torpedoes, will simply be the king of the Black Sea. In the presence of target designation and refueling (if this refueling is needed).

[timokhin-aa]

You need to imagine these processes somehow. Well, at least on a piece of paper draw the enemy’s ships, circles of radio horizons for the radar for detecting sea and air targets, then move the paper-cut boats, airplanes, ekranoplanchiki there with the corresponding speeds.

Well, at least have some idea about the subject. Write your own scenarios on various topics, such as "preventing the enemy surface forces from breaking through the narrowness" with a "game" period of a week and a half.

Something. Please, otherwise there is no strength to read sometimes.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: timokhin-aa

You need to imagine these processes somehow

Well, you wrote this:

Even if all Turkish aviation was busy fighting the Russian Air Force and the Syrian Air Force on two fronts - in Syria itself and over the Black Sea, the Turks would still have enough ships and submarines to destroy our weak group without their planes

, as it doesn’t pull that you made diagrams there, drew circles.

Quote: timokhin-aa

Write your own scenarios on various topics, such as "preventing the enemy surface forces from breaking through the narrowness" with a "game" period of a week and a half.

At a speed of 400 km, the EP will cross the World Cup in 4 hours maximum, but even with the use of Mosquitoes, it will not have to do this either. But on the way "Zircon".

[timokhin-aa]

somehow it doesn’t pull that you made diagrams there, drew circles.

When I want to test some concept, I program the script in Harpoon and sometimes I still consider the battle according to volley equations.
And leaflets with circles also happen, but less often.

[Vladimir_2U]

But at the same time with all this, it seems, they replaced with direct radio visibility with a radio horizon.

[timokhin-aa]

Why?
You are here
https://www.translatorscafe.com/unit-converter/ru-RU/calculator/radar-horizon/

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: timokhin-aa

You are here

I'm from there. )))

Its radio horizon is slightly smaller than that of a surface ship, and is approximately 18-20 kilometers, the ship will detect it a few seconds earlier than the ekranoplan can launch its missiles according to its radar

https://topwar.ru/169792-nemnogo-o-jekranoplanah-ili-pochemu-oni-ne-nuzhny-ni-flotu-ni-vs-v-celom-voobsche.html

Radar horizon is defined as the distance from the antenna to the place where the radar beam “touches” the earth’s surface

https://www.translatorscafe.com/unit-converter/ru-RU/calculator/radar-horizon/Но ведь Carlson is better than a dog))) NK, as a target, is above this line, and here direct radio visibility comes into play!

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

Even without taking into account the low efficiency of the "air-to-air" missile system on the heavy "Lun" rocket launcher (I deliberately take into account the outdated machine)

The first mistake of the alternative is in all its glory: only one side will alternative, the rest do not react in any way.
With the resumption of the Russian ekranoplan program, the foes will immediately take action. The simplest option is the Phoenix with the AIM-120 seeker. Will the ekranoplan be enough for a half-ton rocket with a 60-kg HE warhead falling on it at a speed of several Machs?
And if there are ekranoplanes on the theater, then on the other hand there will be carriers of these missiles in the same place.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Alexey RA

With the resumption of the Russian ekranoplan program, the foes will immediately take action. The simplest option is the Phoenix with the AIM-120 seeker. Will the ekranoplan be enough for a half-ton rocket with a 60-kg HE warhead falling on it at a speed of several Machs?

Will the most difficult option be to install electronic warfare systems and shoot radar and infrared traps? Even without considering physical countermeasures? With a very large stock in mass, for the same "Lunya", which has never been the fruit of an alternative history.

[timokhin-aa]

And the guns on the cockpit do not want? And any heavy missile defense on a catch-up course (the target is always right on the course, cannot maneuver)?

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: timokhin-aa

And the guns on the cockpit do not want? And any heavy missile defense on a catch-up course (the target is always right on the course, cannot maneuver)?

Lun had 23 mm turrets, so not only could he get through the cockpit, well, I don’t know for any SD, but anti-ship missiles, with much more intelligent GSNs than the UR explosives, quite successfully get away from much larger and incomparably slower NK obstacles and veils, whether you don’t know.

[timokhin-aa]

Fill up a turret with a limited shelling sector is not a Newton bin never. The angles are known, but the wing can not maneuver, unlike an airplane.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: timokhin-aa

Fill Turret

TWO turrets at the EP at a speed of 500 km / h at an altitude of not more than 10 m.

This is a bow, 4 barrels in general, aft is not worse, a sector per eye is 150 gr. 80 gr. even if we take the mythical "no" maneuverability of the EA, the shelling is almost circular.

Quote: timokhin-aa

Angles are known

It's funny, it’s either vertically from above, or strictly from the side, it can also be from below, but the torpedoes of the EP are definitely not scary. )))
Now about maneuverability, probably about two degrees of bank; Here is a photo of the board:

As you can see, the roll is indicated to 15 gr. and that's not counting the use of slip.

[timokhin-aa]

And what is the problem for the problem for the aircraft to hit the target from either side? Airplane TOP. Its speed is higher at times.
Maneuverability easily allows you to leave the vertical peak in any direction.
In addition, aircraft work in groups.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: timokhin-aa

Maneuverability easily allows you to leave the vertical peak in any direction.

Only if there is a margin below the target. I doubt very much that automated sights will work on the target against the surface of the surface, which means firing from a distance of no more than 1 km, and the guns of NATO aviation are mostly 20 mm versus 23 mm, despite the fact that the planes are in full view. but there are doubts about automatic capture, already in speed. So only with eyes and handles, from 1 km distance, under the fire of 4 trunks.
And this is only for the original "Moon", without bothering with something heavy, estimate the installation of the turret a la "Dzhigit", the reserve in weight allows, to put it mildly.
And yet, I found the autonomy of the "Lunya": 5 days. In some exotic bay, beauty!

[timokhin-aa]

Americans call it wishful thinking, such as giving the wishful thinking, but in a pathological form, when a person can only think about something that does not violate his psychological comfort.

Here I am powerless. I hope that in matters relating to you personally, you can evaluate things rationally, and not like that.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: timokhin-aa

Americans call it wishful thinking

You still think I'm an adherent of EP. This is not true. But your argument seems weak to me. But this is not your opinion. Quits. )))

[garri-lin]

High-speed and maneuverable targets against the background of the underlying surface with a complex terrain are confidently captured from the 80s. In the automatic mode. From distances of tens of kilometers. Google instant 31 and tomahawks. If hypothetical radar can’t cope, then optics will work on Ur. But if you take pure work from an airplane with a gun, then your main argument is the size of the target. There will be little use from shells. It’s just that it’s unlikely that a plane will be allowed to fly a person with such a view of reality. Fantasy they know sometimes cause laughter. (actually quite often)

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: garri-lin

From distances of tens of kilometers. Google instant 31 and tomahawks. If hypothetical radar can’t cope, then optics will work on Ur

Remind me which UR explosives have combined GOS? And can Tomahawks put at least some sort of interference.

Quote: garri-lin

But if you take pure work from an airplane with a gun, then your main argument is the size of the target. There will be little use from shells. But it’s unlikely that a plane will be allowed to pilot a person with such a view of reality

The fact that you are not friends with elementary logic is clear for a long time, try to make out this nonsense, what does the size of the target have to do with it? At what distance cannon shoot? What does the pilot of the aircraft have to do with it, I’m so for the EP wilderness line.

[garri-lin]

Can you imagine the size of the moon? His EPR? An elementary wake in the water what will be from the screen? A typical target for most explosive missiles. Which by the way work on very maneuverable aircraft. Much faster. And who also put a lot of interference in milking the anti-de-activation to those missiles. But the missiles are coping.
2. I gave you a hint. And you didn’t even understand her. Failed. And the pilot of the aircraft despite the fact that more than one pilot will not try to bring down the ES from the gun. The pilot who tried to make it a pilot will cease to be immediately after landing. For such stupid people are not needed in military aviation. So your OT on the moon are not needed. By the way, if I'm not mistaken for 23 mm there were trap shells. To take away the warmth. But it is not exactly. EPs are beautiful and I really like them too. But alas, their time did not begin. Economic, they are disadvantageous and less universal than conventional aviation.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: garri-lin

An elementary wake in the water what will be from the screen?

Watch the video flight EP, there is no wake trace, there is a small suspension, a powerful trace only until the screen appears. And he is not wake. And write that:

Quote: garri-lin

An elementary wake in the water what will be from the screen? Typical target for most BB missiles

The wake for "most explosive missiles" as a typical target is epic. Epic of stupidity, excuse me.

Quote: garri-lin

And who also put a lot of interference in milking the anti-de-activation to those missiles. But the missiles are coping.

Those. any "Khibiny", AN / ALQ different - is it a money transfer? Missiles only deal with insufficient interference / traps.

Quote: garri-lin

The pilot who tried to make it a pilot will cease to be right after landing

There is such a thing - a combat mission, and if the pilot does not cope with the missiles, then he will have to attack with guns. But since you, so clever, do not know about this, then there is no such thing.

Quote: garri-lin

So your OT on the moon are not needed. By the way, if I'm not mistaken for 23 mm there were trap shells

FROM is it a firing point? Of course you don’t need them, they don’t exist, you don’t consider the photo in principle. And for 23 mm guns there were a lot of types of shells.

[garri-lin]

Oh ignoramus. An airplane radar, if suddenly because of interference it doesn’t see the ES itself, will see the wake of Kotor from the screen is huge. According to these data, it will launch a rocket. Which, having gone out to the target of its seeker, the seeker will find electronic warfare and that krant. Google. Google. This is useful. RCCs work this way. BB does not even need to be upgraded. Typical use. A radar on an airplane at the software level to teach how to fold the coordinates of the wake trace is not RCC and BB. But you do not understand.
2. Khibiny and other similar are good. But this is an eternal struggle. They leash reduce the likelihood of defeat. Today they are effective, tomorrow they will learn to cheat. Khibin 2 will appear. And so endlessly. Aircraft shot down at a stop. Why not put on all mega-effective Khibiny? Why tkh nebylo on su 24 shot down in Syria by Turkey? They are part and not an axiom.
3. If the pilot is not able to fill up a thick non-agile target with missiles designed for this purpose, then this pilot was poorly taught. Or is he a terrible ignoramus. And his place on earth. Well, or let it go to ram. Although, if he didn’t hit missiles, I think that he’ll miss a ram.
4. So it is you and the EP who are going to shoot down the attacking fighters. Although similar turrets on 76 and bears lost relevance a long time ago.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: garri-lin

Oh ignoramus. An airplane radar, if suddenly because of interference it doesn’t see the ES itself, will see the wake of Kotor from the screen is huge. According to these data, it will launch a rocket. Which, having gone out to the target of its seeker, the seeker will find electronic warfare and that krant.

It’s just an idiot, the EF on the screen does not leave a wake, RCC cannot work on the EF on the screen due to the high speed of the EF, even if its GSN is not put in interference! (give a link to the target’s speed for anti-ship missiles above 100 km / h, or a foolish balabol). Impact aircraft radars do not see the wake trace even from large NKs (link or you are a stupid idiot). UR explosives being choked by interference and traps is much simpler than RCC, if only because of their smaller size, but you basically do not understand this.

Quote: garri-lin

Aircraft shot down at a stop. Why not put on all mega-effective Khibiny? Why tkh nebylo on su 24 shot down in Syria by Turkey? They are part and not an axiom.

Your illogicality (or is it idiocy?) Here is simply beyond praise. The fact that there were no notorious Khibin on the downed ones didn’t reach you, the container systems are expensive and quite heavy and very energy-intensive, you probably don’t understand. Well, of course, the dumbest use of the word axiom in combination with the word part.

Quote: garri-lin

thick non-agile target missiles in order

Or both the radar and missiles were crushed by interference and traps. But it didn’t reach you like that.

Quote: garri-lin

Although similar turrets on 76 and bears lost relevance a long time ago.

But for some reason, they don’t remove guns from fighters. You really influence them, maybe they will listen to your mind.

[Fizik M]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

ES on the screen does not leave a wake

listen ... (as if softer) ... before you smack nonsense, at least study a school physics course!
Both VTOL and EP have CS

Quote: Vladimir_2U

RCC cannot work on the ES on the screen due to the high speed of the ES

CAN
details - "established order"

Quote: Vladimir_2U

give a link to the target speed for anti-ship missiles above 100 km / h, or stupid balabol

I do not submit to provocateurs (trying to provoke disclosure)

Quote: Vladimir_2U

Impact aircraft radars do not see the wake trace even from large NKs (link or you are a stupid idiot).

YOU on .... whether
There are radars that even determine the speed of the NK by the CS

Quote: Vladimir_2U

Ur explosives choked by interference and traps much

in this case, they shoot down successfully

Quote: Vladimir_2U

But for some reason, they don’t remove guns from fighters. You really influence them, maybe they will listen to your mind.

gun for targets like KR
but they will beat bears ur

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Fizik M

listen ... (as if softer) ... before you smack nonsense, at least study a school physics course!
Both VTOL and EP have CS

VTOL walks on the screen ?! BalabolLet me not believe it! On-screen EP mixes layers of water? And to what depth, Pan Physicist?

Quote: Fizik M

I do not submit to provocateurs (trying to provoke disclosure)

Balabolam no faith! In open sources, the target speed for the SD / -surface above 100 km / h is not indicated! And I'm not talking about domestic missiles. So gurgling and not confirming your words is a sign of balabol.

Quote: Fizik M

There are radars that even determine the speed of the NK by the CS

On strike aircraft? BalabolLet me disbelieve!

[Fizik M]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

VTOL walks on the screen?

Little Vovochka, for EP, the screen is also a pillow for VTOL, and then you had to study at school, and not skip physics

Quote: Vladimir_2U

Balabolam no faith!

Brechlo Vovochka, you please confirm your tro-lo-lo proofs
you can start with your "absolute electronic warfare"

Quote: Vladimir_2U

In open sources, the target speed for the SD / -surface above 100 km / h is not indicated!

Little Vovochka, I’m grieving you, in a number of anti-ship missiles there is even special protection to prevent their aiming at air targets

Quote: Vladimir_2U

On strike aircraft?

Physically, this provided even the Su-24 radar
software - then it was not implemented, now without problems
and on which airplanes REALLY AND LONG LONG TIME radars with these capabilities are - it's not your thing

Quote: Vladimir_2U

Let me disbelieve!

bullshit Vovochka, you are nobody and there is no way to grab you
and before you start the bubbles, study the school physics course!

[garri-lin]

Explain to me which one will fire an anti-ship missile on a plane? You are so alone. Who thinks about this.
2. Any source of interference is a beacon that a specialized missile can easily direct. EW works well when there are several sources.
3. Complexes of the Khibin type PART of the system. They do not give 100 percent protection.
4. Radars and rockets crushed by traps. ??? Since there are such technologies, then why do you really need your ekranoplanes? They will not be able to aim at no one; they will not fall at anyone. They just roll the missiles and return to base. Why do we bother with opposition? Is it logical? Directly converges with your logic.
5. The gun on the fighter. Substantial theme of a separate demolition. Cannons were abandoned several times. And every time they came back. But only when was the last time the gun was used in battle? And when was the last time the gun was used effectively? On air targets. By speed. Do you have such statistics? Proofs? Or just fantasy? It’s ridiculous. That honest word is ridiculous. Remember the anecdote about auto-hedgehog on the bus? From the side, your reasoning is very reminiscent of that auto-training.

[Fizik M]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

Only if there is a margin below the target. I doubt very much that automated sights will work on the target against the background of the surface

THROW OUT YOUR METHODS
they are rotten
LONG
during the tests of the MiG-29K, an Indian pilot shot down a simulator target KR 2 (TWO) with shells
and this is not so much luck as the merit of the "precision" control system of the MiG

Quote: Vladimir_2U

NATO aviation mainly 20 mm

they have "mostly" AIM-120 and Sidewy

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Fizik M

THROW OUT YOUR METHODS
they are rotten

What kind of politicized nonsense ?.

Quote: Fizik M

during the tests of the MiG-29K, an Indian pilot shot down a simulator target KR 2 (TWO) with shells

From what distance? Will MiG-29 work in domestic EP?

Quote: Fizik M

they have "mostly" AIM-120 and Sidewy

And what is their efficiency even when hit by a 400 ton machine, to which one of the main complaints is the overweight "ship" design? And how immune are they? At least from fired traps. Apart from active electronic warfare, the possibilities for which are much greater on the EF than on a fighter or even a bomber, not counting newfangled EM and laser emitters.

[Fizik M]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

From what distance? Will MiG-29 work in domestic EP?

this is a development system of the early 80s
and to bang EP can a bunch of ways
By the way, the first shot down of the Republic of Moldova at the PMV (15m) is 1974. - AIM-54

Quote: Vladimir_2U

apart from newfangled EM and laser emitters.

by this THREESH you "took off your pants"

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Fizik M

From what distance? Will MiG-29 work in domestic EP?

this is a development system of the early 80s

A wonderful answer, instead of the distance, bring the year of development. Thank you for not being the shoe size of the chief designer.

Quote: Fizik M

and to bang EP can a bunch of ways

What are these ?! Name the anti-ship missiles with target capture at a speed higher than 100 km / h, call the UR explosives immune to interference and LCs, maybe there are torpedoes?

Quote: Fizik M

By the way, the first shot down of the Republic of Moldova at the PMV (15m) is 1974. - AIM-54

Someone denies the ability of URV to work on before. low altitude? True, some consider URV to be immune to interference and LC, a sort of sword-treasure from a fairy tale, possibly about a pony.

Quote: Fizik M

apart from newfangled EM and laser emitters.
fool
by this THREESH you "took off your pants"

What is it? No complaints about EW and traps? Or do you deny the possibility of creating lasers and EM emitters? Come back to reality.

[Fizik M]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

RCC with capture of a target with a speed above 100 km / h

this is a "penny" SOFTWARE revision of the GOS SERIAL RCC
in addition, spending anti-ship missiles on EP is "bold" - UR explosives and missiles will be behind the eyes

Quote: Vladimir_2U

call ur explosives immune to interference and LC

Monsieur, the creation of such an SD is POSSIBLE but IMPAIRABLE, for its cost will be inadequate
therefore there is a probability of disruption guidance, depending on the conditions
however, there is no point in "throwing beads" in front of YOU because of YOUR absolute denseness and obstinacy in these matters

Quote: Vladimir_2U

some people consider UR explosives invulnerable to interference and LC, a sort of sword-treasure from a fairy tale,

YOU please do not ascribe your wet fantasies to others

Quote: Vladimir_2U

Or do you deny the possibility of creating lasers and EM emitters?

what is and what is their effectiveness, I do not know from Murzilka (unlike YOU)

[Vladimir_2U]

What is it? About the distance of cannon fire and no data? Signor Physicist gurgled into the puddle with a capital M, is that all? And how I breathed.

Quote: Fizik M

Monsieur, the creation of such an SD is POSSIBLE but IMPAIRABLE, for its cost will be inadequate

LC fired and towed, jammers built-in and container seem to disagree with Herr Physicist M

timokhin-aa (Alexander Timokhin) Yesterday, 09: 37 + 5
The fact is that the super-newest Sidewinder, with the GOS specially created as capable of cutting off traps, all the same went into the trap.

The words of the author of the article, so, throw away the beads: I am not sorry.

Quote: Fizik M

some people consider UR explosives invulnerable to interference and LC, a sort of sword-treasure from a fairy tale,
YOU please do not ascribe your wet fantasies to others

No, no, for you, the Pan Physicist is clearly an URV explosive that is irresistible to me personally and neither to the LC nor to the towed and towed, the directors of the interference of the built-in and container URV and RCC are not dizzy. By the way, you often mentioned pink ponies there, why? Sublimate something?

Quote: Fizik M

what is and what is their effectiveness, I do not know from Murzilka

Haha, your training manual is rotten, repeat about murzilok.

[Fizik M]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

About the distance of cannon fire and no data?

do YOU ​​google on coupons?
personally, I did not hire myself in front of everyone ... "throw beads"

Quote: Vladimir_2U

In a puddle gurgled

Monsieur gurgled, nonsense and nonsense - this is YOUR part

timokhin-aa (Alexander Timokhin) Yesterday, 09: 37 + 5
The fact is that the super-newest Sidewinder, with the GOS specially created as capable of cutting off traps, all the same went into the trap.

Quote: Vladimir_2U

The words of the author of the article, so, throw away the beads: I am not sorry.

Monsieur, YOU have not grown a metal, YOUR miserable fabrications are stupid, miserable and wretched
as for leaving, I will say a phrase that of course will not reach the "bead eater" (although it is clear to EVERYONE who taught it or just read it) - PROCESS IS PROBABLE

Quote: Vladimir_2U

clearly ur vv something irresistible

no need to ascribe to me YOUR wet fantasies

Quote: Vladimir_2U

your training manual

my manuals were including ammunition manuals acc. complexes
and methods for calculating combat effectiveness (Matveychuk just "lived" in my suitcase)

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Fizik M

do YOU ​​google on coupons?
personally, I did not hire myself in front of everyone ... "throw beads"

The fact that you are a boorish type and so it is clear.

Quote: Fizik M

In a puddle gurgled

Where is the cannon fire distance data? According to the minimum concepts of Internet politeness, at least some kind of link is required, but where are you and where is politeness ...

Quote: Fizik M

PROBABILITY PROCESS

And the fact that electronic warfare and traps or their absence significantly reduce / increase this probability of hitting / missing to a boorish "thrower"

Quote: Fizik M

certainly will not

.

Quote: Fizik M

ammunition manuals acc. complexes
and methods for calculating combat effectiveness

But what, past merits, not the fact that they are still not blown, prevent slipping into insanity and rudeness?

[Fizik M]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

about the minimum concepts of Internet politeness

courtesy doesn’t apply to you, only dunk and flog for you

Quote: Vladimir_2U

And the fact that electronic warfare and traps or their absence significantly reduce / increase this probability of hit / miss

about Little Johnny "saw the light" on the fact that only REDUCES, and not "zeroes" ...

Quote: Vladimir_2U

in senility and rudeness?

Vovochka, insanity is yours here, moreover, stupid and illiterate
like rudeness
so rake

[timokhin-aa]

timokhin-aa (Alexander Timokhin) Yesterday, 09: 37 + 5
The fact is that the super-newest Sidewinder, with the GOS specially created as capable of cutting off traps, all the same went into the trap.
The words of the author of the article, so, throw away the beads: I am not sorry.

After that, the Su-22 was still shot down from the second missile. You stop distorting, otherwise I’m reading, I’m not reading here.
Once again, for those in the tank:

Airplanes in the group, several of them have rockets with different types of GOS and guns, due to a minimum of two-speed superiority and absolute maneuverability, they can hit the target from any direction angle, including staying in the dead zones of defensive firing installations if the target is fending off UR with IR GOS, its destruction UR with ARLGSN, if the target is beaten off and from a pack of such missiles, they will take turns to work by launches on the engines, cockpit, etc., if the target is still alive and continues to cut to the line of launch, then they will call for reinforcements which, due to the same speed superiority, will be in a few minutes and everything is new.

But this is if, as you bring the matter to the point of absurdity, in reality, four URs will fly from 70-80 km and that’s it.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: timokhin-aa

After that, the Su-22 was still shot down from the second missile. You stop distorting, otherwise I’m reading, I’m not reading here.

Where is the distortion here?

Quote: timokhin-aa

The fact is that the super-newest Sidewinder, with the GOS specially created as capable of cutting off traps, all the same went into the trap.

About the plane, not a word at all, strictly about the weak noise immunity.

Quote: timokhin-aa

Aircraft in the group, several of them have rockets with different types of GOS and guns, due to a minimum of twofold superiority in speed and absolute in maneuverability

So EPs can be in a group, and they can hide behind both coastal and naval air defense systems, not counting their possible air defense / missile defense systems (you will not deny the possibility of using air defense from the surface?)
But I just remind you of your own words from this article:

Even if all Turkish aviation was busy fighting the Russian Air Force and the Syrian Air Force on two fronts - in Syria itself and over the Black Sea, the Turks would still have enough ships and submarines to destroy our weak group without their planes.

There are no airplanes over the Black Sea.

[timokhin-aa]

How will the ekranoplan with a speed of 400 km / h be covered by a ship’s air defense system? Will he fly around the ship?

I repeat once again - you are talking nonsense because you do not visually imagine the question, you should not want some idea of ​​how all this happens physically for your insults.

Open google maps.

The goal is to strike at enemy ships in the West Fjord Bay, this is the usual deployment area of ​​the US Navy in the area of ​​responsibility of the Northern Fleet.

Draw the routes for the extension of the ekranoplanes to the target, measure the distances, circle the combat radii of the enemy’s interceptors, draw the radio horizons.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: timokhin-aa

How will the ekranoplan with a speed of 400 km / h be covered by a ship’s air defense system? Will he fly around the ship?

That EP after launch can depart to their ships or shore, which is contrary to the laws of physics or common sense?

Quote: timokhin-aa

The goal is to strike at enemy ships in the Bay of the West Fjord, this is the usual deployment area of ​​the US Navy in the area of ​​responsibility of the Northern Fleet

Since when are the fjords in the Black Sea? You wrote about the Black Sea.

Quote: timokhin-aa

circles, draw the combat radii of the enemy interceptors;

Target designation can be both external, and from a satellite and an UAV, why in this regard are EP worse than RTOs ?! By the fact that the ES and at the launch line are 10 times faster to leave and leave after launch? The fact that in this case the value of intelligence is much higher because much fresher is obviously the same! Here and circles do not need to draw.

[timokhin-aa]

Since when are the fjords in the Black Sea? You wrote about the Black Sea.

I wrote about the Mediterranean and the Arctic, and even about the Pacific Ocean. We have a lot of theater.

But weapons should be universal and applied wherever necessary, right?

Here and circles do not need to draw.

Circles must be drawn. And the arrows. Or, as an option - do not speak out. And then the opponents will one day cease to communicate normally with you and slide into insulting jokes about hitting his head against a wall in childhood, cheap alcohol and psychiatrists.
Well, or simply they will not respond to you, at best.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: timokhin-aa

Circles must be drawn. And arrows

And you can conduct mental experiments. And something in your articles, I don’t recall any tactical schemes, although I could be wrong.

Quote: timokhin-aa

But weapons should be universal and applied wherever necessary, right?

Can RTOs be used in the Arctic? In the winter? Nicheness is niche and EP is competitive in the niche of RTOs.

[Fizik M]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

EP is competitive in the niche of RTOs.

[Fizik M]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

The fact that ES after launch can depart to their ships or shore,

if they are allowed
for they will be shot on the way

Quote: Vladimir_2U

By the fact that the ES and at the launch line are 10 times faster to leave and leave after launch? The fact that in this case the value of intelligence is much higher because much fresher is obviously the same!

Little Vovochka, I certainly understand that it’s all the same to you useless (it won’t reach), but they don’t go and fly on the control center and use the WEAPONS, so again you blow bubbles out of the puddle

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Fizik M

but they don’t go and fly on the control center, and WEAPONS are used, so again you let the bubbles out of the puddle

The fact that the line of launch is the line of use of weapons for you, Maxim, is not available, or what? In Google banned about the range and capabilities of RCC, or did the damned brain eat through secrecy?

[Fizik M]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

RCCs, with much more intelligent GSNs than those of the UR explosives, are quite successfully moving away from much larger and incomparably slower NKs with noise and curtains,

shitty they are gone
against modern gos

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Fizik M

shitty they are gone
against modern gos

There are no examples so far, but there are limitations for RCC in terms of target speed, up to 100 km. Is it cooler?

[Fizik M]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

No examples yet,

more than examples, but this is not about YOUR "pink ponies"

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Fizik M

more than examples, but this is not about YOUR "pink ponies"

Something of the proofs is not visible, with overcoming the RCC active interference, LC and curtains.

[Fizik M]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

Some proofs are not visible,

get admission, and the "established order" - "proof" is more than enough

[Fizik M]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

Is the most difficult option to install electronic warfare systems and shoot radar and infrared traps?

Is electronic warfare for YOU a "magic stone"?

[Svateev]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

But how do all the ships of the Russian Navy get from the Black Sea to the Mediterranean? The bosporus.

The ships passed the Bosphorus long before the aggravation with Turkey, when we were still allies. And the ekranoplan must fly TO use weapons. And do you think the Turks will miss it ?!
Half of the article is devoted to the main trump card of the Navy - long before the aggravation, go where you need and hang out there for months.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Svateev

Ships passed the Bosphorus long before the aggravation with Turkey, when we were still allies

An ekranoplan - it may be an undership, but in tow and it can be taken through the Bosphorus, directly to Tartus. The Lunya, for example, has a wingspan not like the Boeing 747.
There are no questions regarding the actions of the EP in the Black Sea.

[timokhin-aa]

There is only one question - WHY is it in tow through the Bosphorus? To make the world laugh? Do you know how one of the Eaglets was lost? The ekranoplan is not only bad in flight

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: timokhin-aa

There is only one question - WHY carry it in tow through the Bosphorus?

For basing on Tartus. For example.

Quote: timokhin-aa

Do you know how one of the Eaglets was lost?

Is there evidence of a gross pilot error, or do you think there were few planes crashed when exceeding the angle of attack and the subsequent stall?

[timokhin-aa]

For basing on Tartus. For example.

What can an ekranoplan do, why cannot the ships of the permanent connection of the Navy and Su-30SM of naval aviation permanently deployed at sea with Khmeimima?

More truly not so. For what feature of the ekranoplan we have to pay the cost of 50 Su-30SM or FIVE corvettes (approximately)? What function will Navy Tartus get for this money, which could not be provided with available funds?

Is there evidence of a gross pilot error, or do you think there were few planes crashed when exceeding the angle of attack and the subsequent stall?

Google the fate of the eagles built. There is a towing there.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: timokhin-aa

Google the fate of the eagles built. There is a towing there.

There is a refusal to tow the broken Orlyonok, and its subsequent sinking, as after the battle, by the way.

Quote: timokhin-aa

What can an ekranoplan do, why cannot the ships of the permanent connection of the Navy and Su-30SM of naval aviation permanently deployed at sea with Khmeimima?

Ships cannot, at a speed of 500 km / h, reach the launch line of the anti-ship missiles and leave it, and the Su-30SM cannot hang out for several (at least several) hours in waves awaiting target designation. Obviously the same.

Quote: timokhin-aa

For what feature of the ekranoplan we have to pay the cost of 50 Su-30SM or FIVE corvettes (approximately)

You have given an incorrect calculation of the cost of developing an electronic signature, how did you derive the cost of the first electronic signature on this?

[timokhin-aa]

Ships cannot, at a speed of 500 km / h, reach the launch line of the anti-ship missiles and leave it, and the Su-30SM cannot hang out for several (at least several) hours in waves awaiting target designation. Obviously the same.

Su-30SM may well hang in the air, waiting for the control unit, and then go on the attack at 900 km / h. And they can also stand at the airport and with their speed will reach the target faster than the ekranoplan starting from the water.
With greater survivability. And without the risk of staying in drift due to worsening weather
They can, for example, hang out under the protection of air defense systems.

And for a salvo with six missiles (1 ekranoplan) you need only 6 Su-30SM or 2-3 Su-34.

Still not clear?

Once again - quick attacks are carried out by aviation, because it makes them quickly and repeatedly, in a day you can fly 500-600 km from the airfield twice per strike.

The retention of the water area and the descent of the enemy is carried out by ships. They have LOTS of missiles, air defense, and the ability to be in the designated area for MONTHS.

Where is the ekranoplan niche?

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: timokhin-aa

Su-30SM may well hang in the air, waiting for TsU, and then go on the attack at 900 km / h

How much specifically, at what distance from the base? Three hours right above it, the PTB is not there, as are the Su-34s. And with what missiles, by the way? Not for 4 tons each, for sure.

Quote: timokhin-aa

With greater survivability. And without the risk of staying in drift due to worsening weather

The low survivability of ES is very controversial, and without weather forecast it is fraught to go out for NK. Actually.

Quote: timokhin-aa

Where is the ekranoplan niche?

Black and Caspian seas, if there are bases, any seas of this type and archipelagos. There is a niche.

[Fizik M]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

Low survivability of EP is very controversial,

[ser56]

Quote: timokhin-aa

Question one

Aren't you lazy to spend time on this opponent?

[timokhin-aa]

Already laziness, yes, I’ll tie up soon.

[Vladimir_2U]

Sorry, typo.

[Fizik M]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

There are no questions regarding the actions of the EP in the Black Sea.

only in YOUR "land of pink ponies"

[kpd]

It is also desirable to provide for the possibility of placing a universal launcher on ALL new ships and vessels, with the possibility of using this space for other needs and quickly equipping the launcher in case of mobilization. Are the seaworthiness of small vessels bad? Not enough seaworthiness? But there are many of them and it is much more difficult to destroy many small targets than a small number of large ships.

[pmkemcity]

Quote: kpd

with the possibility of using this space for other needs and quickly equipping a launcher in case of mobilization.

What kind of "mobilization" are you talking about?
This means that it is necessary to produce missiles, launchers, store them somewhere, prepare calculations. And how do you order to re-equip the ships during the "threatened period", at what capacities, by what workers, in what time frame?
If you mean "in the event of mobilization" to sell oil, hold a tender with the proceeds, make missiles at a plant, quickly organize a class at TOVVMUh, recruit teachers and boys - then when, in your opinion, should "mobilization" be announced? Right now?

[kpd]

But the rockets themselves are not needed, the very possibility of placing them on everything that can float is important. In this case, the enemy will be forced to fear all ships.

[pmkemcity]

Quote: kpd

But the rockets themselves are not needed, the very possibility of placing them on everything that can float is important. In this case, the enemy will be forced to fear all ships.

So set up production of "Club" in a container, build about twenty container ships, put sailors in "jackets" there, and let them sail on the "sea-okey". Can spit on everything! Eh! Even though this hour is such a "passenger" ...

[timokhin-aa]

This is very difficult, EDG is high, you need a BIOS to apply it, etc.

For armament of civilian ships, container options would probably be better.

[kpd]

The presence or absence of a container is determined visually, but when simulating launch cells, it is much more difficult to say if there is a rocket inside or not.
The presence of a complete BIOS is also not necessary. Target designation can be carried out remotely.

[timokhin-aa]

Remained a little - a well with a depth of 9 meters and BIUS for a billion for each seiner.

[kpd]

Well - yes, with the ability to place in it, for example, a fuel tank.
BIUS - only power circuits and a place for installation are needed.
Yes - you still need a fake well cover imitating the hatches of rocket mines.

[timokhin-aa]

There she is. The glass itself must have sufficient strength to withstand the "mortar" launch of the rocket - the ejection of the rocket upward with a powder charge.
And rigidity, so that NEVER a storm its geometry floats even a little. Even so that the vibration of large amplitude does not pass.

And yes, do not forget about the systems for creating and maintaining the microclimate in TPK installations, air conditioners and electric power (diesel generators) for them, etc.
This is unrealistic. These are hundreds of extra tons of displacement. Generator, hardware, cable channels for future cable routes, reinforcing decks, etc.

And who will buy such a ship? You want to equip ALL ships?

[pmkemcity]

Quote: timokhin-aa

For armament of civilian ships, container options would probably be better.

For arming ships, the ships themselves are needed.

[timokhin-aa]

We have more of them than the USA.

[pmkemcity]

Quote: timokhin-aa

We have more of them than the USA.

Are you talking about "courts"? So maybe the "regional", yes "world".

[timokhin-aa]

This is me about the payroll - all non-military more than 1000 tons.

[pmkemcity]

Quote: timokhin-aa

This is me about the payroll - all non-military more than 1000 tons.

I strongly doubt something. And there are probably no container ships under the flag of the Russian Federation, except perhaps the river-sea.

[timokhin-aa]

UNCTAD statistics were published not so long ago. Everything there - and ships under the national flag and their tonnage, and ships under national control and a convenient flag and their tonnage.

The United States has more tonnage and significantly, but fewer units. But for ships mobilized into the navy, tens of thousands of tons of displacement are superfluous from the word "absolutely".

As for the flags, as soon as one officer and the four marines are understood on board, the flag there will immediately be raised correctly, which one is needed.

[pmkemcity]

Quote: timokhin-aa

As for the flags, as soon as one officer and the four marines are understood on board, the flag there will immediately be raised correctly, which one is needed.

If it were that simple. We went very far with "privatization".

[timokhin-aa]

Do not underestimate Mother Russia.

[pmkemcity]

Quote: timokhin-aa

Do not underestimate Mother Russia.

But what about raven-raven?

[LeonidL]

How many of the "ships" fly the Russian flag, how many of them are state-owned? What kind of bourgeois will allow you to stuff on his "ship" something that does not bring profit? Rather hang the flag of Liberia or Korea ...

[Alexey RA]

Quote: timokhin-aa

We have more of them than the USA.

Yeah ... only when ships were needed for the Syrian Express, instead of mobilizing their ships with the flag of the auxiliary fleet, they had to buy Turkish and Ukrainian tubs for the Navy. And where did your merchant fleet just go?

[timokhin-aa]

The question of mobilization was not raised then. And the government reasonably did not bring its fleet under sanctions.
In the case of global kneading, everything will be different.

[Doccor18]

"It is also desirable to provide for the possibility of placing a universal launcher on ALL new ships and vessels .."

Unfortunately, there is no unification even for ships. Several types
RTOs and corvettes, with small series of each type.
Everyone knows about the ease of use and maintenance of the same type of ships and weapons systems. However, for some reason, there are no large series of the same type of ships to this day.

[kpd]

But it is not necessary to unify the ships at the project level, only the launcher and its control equipment are unified.
The lack of unification is now associated with too rapid development of electronics and weapons systems. Nevertheless, the role and methods of using modern ships are now changing very quickly.
Yes, and unification will give more at the level of equipment and weapons than at the level of layout of the case.

[Shadow041]

The presence of ground launchers does not eliminate the need for RTOs, since all of these KARAKURTS and BUYAN-M can qualitatively replace the Soviet RTOs of the type Gadfly ...

[timokhin-aa]

Who told you such nonsense? "Gadflies" can be replaced with "Karakurt".
But the trick is that we simply don't need new "Gadflies". The main threat in the near sea zone is submarines, aircraft and small ships of the enemy, such as missile boats or LCS.
"Karakurt" stupidly does not have enough speed to fight them on its own, and if there is an external control center, there is aviation.

As for the Buoys, it’s just a barge.

No specialized RTOs are needed in principle. Generally.

[Shadow041]

Aviation can supplement the fleet, but not replace it ... The fleet needs a full fleet, without excesses in one direction, which means that ships of all classes are needed ...

[timokhin-aa]

Multipurpose ships of all classes. Excluding such specialized ones that you can’t do without, such as missile boats or aircraft carriers.

[ser56]

Quote: timokhin-aa

No specialized RTOs are needed in principle. Generally.

They were built for the Caspian from the beginning - there it is quite ...

[timokhin-aa]

They were just built. For the Caspian, they lack seaworthiness, the gun turned out to be too powerful, the ship takes off course when fired, extensive damage on board. Well, there’s still diesel under sanctions, there’s nowhere to get spare parts, soon they will be put on a joke, etc.
RK "Dagestan" is suitable for the Caspian Sea. In general, there would be enough missile boats and small landing ships.

[ser56]

Quote: timokhin-aa

RK "Dagestan" is suitable for the Caspian Sea.

no doubt - generally a good corvette - why not build ...

Quote: timokhin-aa

when firing, the ship takes off course

so simply Buyan is such an instrument, and he is almost half the size ...

Quote: timokhin-aa

nowhere to get spare parts

this is a question for specialists - during the USSR they bought anything if they wanted ...

[jonht]

Alexander, when analyzing ground-based systems, you forgot to add air defense systems to protect them from aviation, reconnaissance systems, and protection against saboteurs. Yes, RTOs are not the best option and are also poorly protected from aviation, protected from submarines. Again traffic on the roads and traffic at sea. But, like any MRC weapon, it requires an application concept, developed tactics for use, and if there is one, then they were built accordingly. maybe .
Yours!

[timokhin-aa]

Alexander, when analyzing ground-based systems, you forgot to add air defense systems to protect them from aviation, reconnaissance systems, and protection against saboteurs.

This is all without rocket parts will have to do and pay for it too.

But, like any MRC weapon, it requires an application concept, developed tactics for use, and if there is one, then they were built accordingly. maybe

At the beginning of the article, an approximate "concept" was just described.

[pmkemcity]

The fleet in a big war is a weapon of one strike, and this strike must be well prepared in advance, even in peacetime. I consider the deployment of non-nuclear CDs on strike ships to be a great folly. There are few ships, but there are many enemies, and they all ask to "give it out in full."
To display the flag, other ships are needed. Seaworthy, long-range, reliable, with good living conditions. The number of CDs with non-nuclear warheads does not matter, 8-10 pieces are quite enough. for a couple of volleys. After all, Russia is not now facing the task of "bombing into the Stone Age" any state. For "Amin's palace" is enough.
And to digest Europe and China, it is necessary to offer railway complexes with both KR and BR, as well as with air defense systems. Such complexes would well have "sea" mobility (from 1000 to 2000 km / day) and could strengthen any grouping, even in the West, even in the East in a matter of hours, both in the shock version and in the air defense version. In addition to high mobility, such complexes would have an almost infinite (in comparison with a car chassis) motor resource and stealth.

[BREAKTHROUGH READY]

There will be no big war (the whole world is in dust), but it is necessary to prepare for a real war, and obviously not by "demonstrating the flag."

[pmkemcity]

Great war (the whole world in ruin) will not be

Did the comrades from the Comintern tell you this? And Syria (present-day Spain), and Khalkhin-gol, which is still ahead, and the war in Europe ... You this "tell Comrade Stalin that a monstrous mistake has occurred"!

[BREAKTHROUGH READY]

Did the comintern comrades tell you this?

this tells me knowledge of human nature. No one starts a war without the possibility of profit from it.

You are "tell Comrade Stalin that a monstrous mistake has occurred"!

he just did believe that no monstrous mistake had happened, and the Second World War massacre only benefited (we read again 2 sentences in the commentary).

[pmkemcity]

No one starts a war without the possibility of profit from it.

And "forgiving debts" is not a reason? Germany has forgiven America's debts and was asked to "work it out."

he just did believe that no monstrous mistake had happened, and the massacre of World War II only benefited

It is not for us to judge "Him". "He" brilliantly turned out of the situation.

[BREAKTHROUGH READY]

And "forgiving debts" is not a reason?

What kind of debts are we talking about? Hitler’s refusal to pay reparations or something else?

"He" brilliantly turned out of the situation.

That's for sure. So that having a virtually mobilized economy, a huge army and a population that until that 20 years lived from hand to mouth forging "the shield and sword of the world revolution", and 2 years of head start after "the case smelled of kerasin", while managing to lose almost the entire pre-war army and 26 millions of citizens, you need to be a truly genius. There was no more mediocre leadership in world history.

It is not for us to judge "Him".

To us, gray and wretched serf, it’s forbidden to think at all, and we will leave the yoke with rattles, and the scourge as a legacy. It is so?

[pmkemcity]

Quote: READY FOR BREAKTHROUGH

What kind of debts are we talking about? Hitler’s refusal to pay reparations or something else?

You are, however, insightful. And at least America’s debts to everyone.

Quote: READY FOR BREAKTHROUGH

There was no more mediocre leadership in world history.

You do not know the story well - from Anthony, for example, to the Fuhrer.

Quote: READY FOR BREAKTHROUGH

It’s forbidden for us, gray and wretched serf, to think at all

Thinking is just not forbidden. Thinking is not kosher, for the rabbis have already thought about everything and written down in the Talmud.

[Sergei 777]

I see one more problem. Is our industry able to supply calibers in the proper volumes? And then the author was dispersed ... All of the old projects remake Caliber, Caliber in the Ground Forces. If we consider that each medium must have a minimum of spare bq, then there are too many calibers. Industry may not keep up.

[Peter is not the first]

After the Americans withdrew from the agreement on short- and medium-range packets, most likely the money was already allocated for the design of land installations and for the expansion of the plant (s) for the production of rockets necessary for them.

[Sergei 777]

most likely the money has already been allocated

Tightly legend and hard to believe

[timokhin-aa]

Is our industry able to supply calibers in the proper volumes?

This problem is and is in acute form, but it must be solved in any case.

[Fizik M]

Quote: Sergey 777

I see one more problem. Is our industry able to supply calibers in the proper volumes? And then the author was dispersed ... All of the old projects remake Caliber, Caliber in the Ground Forces. If we consider that each medium must have a minimum of spare bq, then there are too many calibers. Industry may not keep up.

correct statement of the question
even 9 women will not have a baby in 1 month
however, the CD of the Kyrgyz Republic should be increased to the maximum possible, and should be resp. priorities

[Sergey Valov]

“Then the four“ ground Caliber ”could be carried on its semitrailer by an ordinary KAMAZ tractor - in addition to the Iskanders or instead of them” - if everything was so simple, then no one would create specialized equipment. How to solve the issue of patency, smoothness of movement, placement of spare parts and other related "things" with KAMAZ, placement of calculation, etc. And instead of other machines of the complex also take to KAMAZ?
“Cruise missiles should be used by the fleet to solve their operational and tactical tasks, in the framework of the struggle for supremacy at sea” - this is precisely this “departmental” approach that can destroy a country in the event of a conflict when the fleet wages its war, and the army, its own. The war is one for all, and the armed forces must fight in concert. A great example of this is Syria.

[timokhin-aa]

How to solve the issue of patency, smoothness of movement, placement of spare parts and other related "things" with KAMAZ, placement of calculation, etc. And instead of other machines of the complex also take to KAMAZ?

Do you know that in the Iskander division at the MZKT there are only launchers and TPMs, and everything else is on KAMAZ trucks right now?

it is precisely this “departmental” approach that is capable of ditching a country in case of conflict, when the fleet will conduct its war, and the army, its own.

If necessary, nothing will prevent the use of naval missiles in non-naval tasks, if the situation requires.
Now we have a situation when, due to an irrational approach to the construction of URO ships and the principles of missile deployment, the capabilities of the Navy are "slaughtered". And it costs a lot of money.

Taking army missile units as a basis, we will be able to provide several times more powerful salvo for less money - examples are given in the text. And the ships that shot the Kyrgyz Republic need to return to the base, which by this moment may not even be there.

[Sergey Valov]

“Having taken the army missile units as a basis, we will be able to provide several times more powerful salvo” - I also think so.
“Nothing will prevent, if necessary, using naval missiles in non-naval tasks” - it may interfere, which has repeatedly happened in our country, narrowly departmental thinking.
"And everything else in KAMAZ now?" - I did not know, well, if so.

[timokhin-aa]

It may interfere with what has happened more than once in our country, narrowly departmental thinking.

Do you know how it was solved? "Your destroyer has two anti-ship missiles - the fleet commander's reserve."

Of the eight. And that’s it.

[Sergey Valov]

But the fleet commander is not a representative of the department?

[timokhin-aa]

In the case of the allocation to the reserve of the Kyrgyz Republic, there may be a Directive from the General Staff to the Glavkomat with the order on which fleet and how many missiles cannot be spent at one’s discretion and what their minimum balance should be, and even by time (until tomorrow - no less then no less so, etc.)

[Sergey Valov]

Blessed is he who believes.

[Svateev]

Quote: Sergey Valov

In the event of a conflict, the “departmental” approach is capable of ditching the country, when the fleet will conduct its war, and the army, its

So, the sailor wrote the article ... About everything - right, besides this unwillingness to submit to the general task.

[LeonidL]

"Duc, a sailor wrote an article" - Mr. Timokhin has never been a seaman or a naval officer or an officer at all, a sort of self-taught Napoleon. Don't believe me? Ask the author yourself. By the way, I recommend retrospectively reviewing all the author's creations - he apparently forgets today what he wrote the day before yesterday.

[iouris]

In the USSR, similar issues were resolved in the commander-in-chiefs, at which research institutes were formed, again institutes of the Academy of Sciences, university science ... Special departments provided secrecy. It turns out that everything is simpler. Here it is.

[BREAKTHROUGH READY]

Just the same "research commanders of the USSR" issued the terms of reference and spent an abyss of resources on the wunderwafles from which absolutely shizo stung.

[timokhin-aa]

And where in the end is the USSR, one may ask? This is not to say that one blogger replaces a research institute, I just had to say a word.

[BREAKTHROUGH READY]

It’s probably naive to believe that the ships will begin to build thanks to a chain of random events, but oh well. In general, I agree with the contents of the article, it is surprising to read similar from the author, who until relatively recently was in the sect of holy calibers.

[timokhin-aa]

The story of how the RTOs appeared was written from the words of its participants.

[BREAKTHROUGH READY]

There are not participants, but partners in the cut. Hand washes a hand. They will carry any charitable nonsense, if this helps to smear where it should or avoid responsibility.

[timokhin-aa]

No, those with whose words are written to the money did not even try to snuggle

[LeonidL]

The participants sat in a circle and sang together ... I'm afraid that these are participants at the level of laboratory captain. real people are unlikely to communicate with the author, knowing his writing style and hate those who wear embroidered stars on shoulder straps, stripes and generally achieved more than the author in life.

[Fizik M]

Quote: LeonidL

real people are unlikely to communicate with the author,

no, LeonidLo, don't communicate
because Timokhin is not in Moscow and not in St. Petersburg (which these real people were very sorry about)
just READ

[LeonidL]

Thank you, Maksimushka laughed! Is the sky blue over Canada? Are the slanting rains between birches? ... The Ministry of Defense, the General Staff, the Kremlin ... weep and sob from the inability to communicate with Mr. Timokha. Read Gogol's "The Inspector General" at night!

[Fizik M]

Quote: LeonidL

Is the sky over Canada blue?

oooo how everything is running ...
I'm sorry, but I do not have a medical education to treat YOU

[timokhin-aa]

LeonidL convinced himself that I was writing from Canada.
For some reason, it’s not from America or England, but from Canada.
Something clicked in the brain apparently.

[Fizik M]

Quote: timokhin-aa

Something clicked in the brain apparently.

rather in the cerebellum
or "next to him"

[Slippery]

Alexander. I always read your articles with pleasure, but is it not too dashing to replace TPK, inspection, connection, test, flight task in two hours? And even this isn’t the main thing, according to the Iskanders, Europe is nervous, and if there are also Caliber, then we will really turn into a rogue, here China becomes nervous, and then we won’t even buy any technology or products on the trails of Ho Chi Minh. But overseas friends can rivet as much as they like, they are afraid of Mexico. Deliver to Europe is not so difficult if something happens.

[timokhin-aa]

inspection

Before installation on the PU.

connection, test, flight mission in two hours, but in such quantities is not too famously?

In what quantities? In the division, as there were 4 launchers, it remains. Preparing flight missions in advance is technically possible if you prepare.

if there are also Gauges, then we will really turn into a rogue, here China becomes nervous, and then we won’t even buy any technology or products along the paths of Ho Chi Minh.

We do not have to blow the whole world about what we are doing. And drag rockets to Kaliningrad too.

[Slippery]

Quote: timokhin-aa

Before installation on the PU.

agree beguiled for dinner)))

Quote: timokhin-aa

In what quantities? In the division, as there were 4 launchers, it remains. Preparing flight missions in advance is technically possible if you prepare.

Do you seriously think that the flight task is like throwing pictures from a flash drive onto a computer? The Yankees in the last ax are proud of 40 minutes and started from 10-12 hours.

Quote: timokhin-aa

We do not have to blow the whole world about what we are doing. And drag rockets to Kaliningrad too.

I'm surprised the user style answer is "operator"

[timokhin-aa]

What's the question? In entering flight mission? Americans used to load it almost with punch cards, hence the deadlines are bad. Preparation of a flight mission consists of stages - on the first it is made up, on the second it is loaded into a rocket.
The second stage is quite real for the time that I described.
You must worry about the first in advance.
On the other hand, if you do not like two hours, count for three or four and then compare the SMRK again.

[Old26]

But Russia still has something else in store. We look at the launcher of the export version of Caliber - the Club complex. Instead of a pair of missiles, four were used. On a similar four-axle chassis from the same manufacturer - MZKT.
At MAKS, EMNIP 2009, this launcher was positioned as a coastal launcher of anti-ship missiles, and by no means an export launcher

Remembering the failed container launchers for surface ships, let’s say that such installations could prove to be effective on the road, and then the four “ground Caliber” could be carried on its semi-trailer by an ordinary KAMAZ tractor - in addition to the Iskander or instead them.

At the same MAKS, this container misunderstanding was positioned as an export weapon system. For countries that do not have the ability to have a full-fledged military fleet. True, the designers, having created this system, completely forgot that such a system can be placed on a ship carrying either a naval flag or a flag of the auxiliary forces of the Navy. But if it is a covert basing on a civilian ship, then, sorry, it will be banal piracy. In addition, in addition to the container, which the respected author proposes to put on the truck, do not forget that the complex also includes a container with a radar station. And the military model. Which will be quickly determined by the enemy forces. And further - further such camouflaged trucks will be corny destroyed. At the same time, not having 100% certainty what kind of container it is, with missiles or an ordinary civilian, all such trucks will be affected, that is, the infrastructure will also be destroyed. so such an export gift for another country will be a very unpleasant "gift"
On our territory, of course, such containers are unlikely to be immediately detected and hit, but do not forget that the "Caliber" is a subsonic missile and can be hit ...

Quote: Sergey 777

Is our industry able to supply calibers in the proper volumes?

Last year we can say that about 100-120 "Calibers" were produced per year ....

[timokhin-aa]

Regarding the Klaba, this is an export version of the PKR, but this launcher shows the technical ability to quickly create a four-shot launcher on the same ground for the nazemnaya Caliber.

Regarding the fact that the container Club was located in two containers - we don’t need to launch anti-ship missiles, we don’t need radars and control systems, we have a control machine, everything will load from where we need it.

That is, it was about using the backlog.

As for trucks, 50-150 trucks pass per hour through any section of any federal road in any more or less populated region of the Russian Federation. The launcher on the semi-trailer will not be distinguishable from the truck in absolutely anything, neither in the optical range, nor in the radar, nor in the infrared. Only a reconnaissance group that has reached a visual detection distance will be able to understand that this is not just a tractor with a semi-trailer, namely a launcher.

But such a group still needs to be thrown where necessary, Russia is big, there are many roads and parking lots, garages and boxes too.

Unresolved issue.

[ser56]

Very reasonable analysis!

[Slippery]

Quote: timokhin-aa

What's the question? In entering flight mission? Americans used to load it almost with punch cards, hence the deadlines are bad. Preparation of a flight mission consists of stages - on the first it is made up, on the second it is loaded into a rocket.
The second stage is quite real for the time that I described.
You must worry about the first in advance.
On the other hand, if you do not like two hours, count for three or four and then compare the SMRK again.

Alexander is fine, I didn’t expect that you would react . I agree that RTOs with our budget are better to set aside and engage in anti-aircraft missile and mine-torpedo direction, we are not happy there.

[Fizik M]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

as they are not in the Su-34.

Yes

[barin]

It would be necessary to first accumulate a stock

[asr55]

the author of the article is a specialist with the knowledge of a student, although he painted himself there. Hello, lay down on the sofa more comfortably.