New Russian project 22350 frigates will receive enhanced weapons


The seventh and eighth frigates of project 22350 will now be able to arm 24 assault missiles of various types. For example, it can be supersonic Zircon missiles.


It is reported by the news agency. TASSreferring to sources in the military-industrial complex.

The frigates in question are only about to lay at the Severnaya Verf shipyard. The same weapons will be able to get the “Admiral Chichagov” and “Admiral Amelko”, which were laid down in 2019.

The construction of the seventh and eighth frigates of the series is planned to be carried out according to an improved project, which provides for enhanced weapons. They will receive 24 vertical installations of the universal ship firing complex (UKSK) ZS-14, suitable for several types of missiles. They can be used to launch Caliber, Zircon or Onyx missiles.

The developers managed to carve out a place on board the frigate to add another one to two sections of eight launchers. In this case, the displacement of the frigate has changed slightly.

The laying of two new warships of project 22350 is scheduled for the end of this month. It is assumed that the frigates included in this series will become a serious deterrent and strengthen the defense capability of the Russian Federation.
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

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

I have an account? Sign in

  1. DMB 75 April 17 2020 10: 49 New
    • 21
    • 5
    +16
    Here's the good news! Ships seven feet under the keel!
    1. novel66 April 17 2020 10: 54 New
      • 21
      • 3
      +18
      and reliable power plant ..
      1. Serg65 April 17 2020 12: 39 New
        • 4
        • 1
        +3
        Quote: novel xnumx
        and reliable power plant ..

        Is there a problem with her?
        1. novel66 April 17 2020 12: 42 New
          • 5
          • 1
          +4
          is not it so...
        2. vadim dok April 17 2020 15: 12 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          Her reliable just no. Bye!
          1. alexmach April 17 2020 16: 07 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            Her reliable just no. Bye!

            Well, yes, he would have such a power plant with which you can go on long trips without fear. Even to circumnavigate the world could go to demonstrate the capabilities of the power plant.
            Wait a minute ...
    2. rich April 17 2020 10: 55 New
      • 11
      • 9
      +2
      What are seven feet? Have you read the article carefully? They are only going to mortgage. That's when they are ready - then we wish
    3. Sky strike fighter April 17 2020 10: 58 New
      • 11
      • 1
      +10
      Well, that’s already something. The news is good. But I would like to speed up work on 22350 M. Although, in my opinion, it is more logical to equip Zircons primarily with submarines due to the numerical superiority of the conditional enemy in the surface fleet. In general, it would be nice to make air-based Zircon for those the same Su-34. Although the X-59MK2 is suitable for the first time as an anti-ship missile.
      1. Oleg1263 April 17 2020 11: 05 New
        • 1
        • 12
        -11
        It is believed that the "Zircon" is a numbed X-32.
        1. Sky strike fighter April 17 2020 11: 10 New
          • 9
          • 0
          +9
          Quote: oleg1263
          It is believed that the "Zircon" is a numbed X-32.

          Are you laughing? X-32 is a colossus of almost more than 5 tons, there is only a warhead per ton weighing 12 meters long. It was created on the basis of X-22 and technologies tested on the X-90 GZUR.
          1. Oleg1263 April 17 2020 11: 34 New
            • 0
            • 3
            -3
            No, I don’t laugh. X32 has less warheads than X22. This is the first, second - these are similar Technical characteristics, of those that can be found in the public domain - flight altitude, speed, and radius of destruction. Although, of course, a completely new development cannot be ruled out.
            1. Sky strike fighter April 17 2020 11: 47 New
              • 5
              • 0
              +5
              Find on the Internet a photo of the Tu-22M3 flight with two X-32s suspended for clarity. Look at the weight and parameters of the X-32 and figure out how to theoretically launch such a program from UKKS, from where Zircon is launched. UKKS parameters on the Internet are not a problem either.
            2. Grigory_45 April 18 2020 01: 03 New
              • 2
              • 1
              +1
              Quote: oleg1263
              X32 has less warheads than X22

              due to which the fuel supply is increased and a more powerful engine is installed

              Quote: oleg1263
              the second is similar Technical characteristics, of those that can be found in the public domain - flight altitude, speed, and radius of destruction.

              nothing at all similar. X-32 is not hypersonic, nothing is known about the altitude of Zircon. With regard to range, it depends solely on the fuel supply, engine voracity and flight profile, and there is no indicator for ranking as “relatives”
              You’d better look at the dimensions of the rocket, but remember that Zircon should be launched from the unified UKKS (the length of the rocket is not more than 9 meters, the diameter is up to 0,7 m, the mass is no more than 4 tons)
        2. venik April 17 2020 12: 13 New
          • 7
          • 2
          +5
          Quote: oleg1263
          It is believed that the "Zircon" is a numbed X-32.

          =======
          There is an opinion that this is the opinion of AMATEURS who do not know anything about rocketry! fool
          1. Oleg1263 April 17 2020 12: 16 New
            • 1
            • 2
            -1
            A bit strange reaction. Motivate, if not difficult.
            1. venik April 17 2020 14: 33 New
              • 9
              • 1
              +8
              Quote: oleg1263
              A bit strange reaction. Motivate, if not difficult.

              ========
              From what? Please include the brains given to us by nature and begin to compare:
              first: X-32 - a deep modernization of the X-22, retaining the same mass-dimensional characteristics, namely: dimensions 11.7 x 0.9 m (!) And weight - approx. 6.0 tons (!!). Those. neither according to DIMENSIONS, NNI by MASS in UKKS - well, it does NOT fit in anyway (even if you hammer it in the UKKS and Onyx, it hardly fits, but its dimensions and weight are much more modest: 8.0 x 0,67 m and weight - 3.0 tons. Conclusion: UKKS X-32 missiles can’t be fired! And Zircons can (and shoots)! So its mass-dimensional h-ki are approximately equal to Onyx (ie it should be almost twice as light and one third more compact than the X-32!
              Second: X-32, like the prototype X-22, is a ONE-STAGE rocket with a LIQUID RD on "high boiling" components! Moreover, the fuel is extremely toxic, and the oxidizing agent is an extremely aggressive substance! These missiles refuel just before takeoff, and drain fuel and oxidizer (if the rocket is not used) - immediately after landing! Rockets very dangerous during operation and putting them on a ship where they can be sweat - two and a half dozen - just ANYONE in the "head" will not be too DANGEROUS !! Even “encapsulating” fuel components is not an option!
              As for the Zircon, it is a TWO-STAGE rocket, where the launch accelerator is SOLID FUEL, and the rocket itself has a RECTANGULAR taxiway.
              The third X-32 has a speed of not more than 4.5 M (i.e., not calling it "hypersonic" like that does not work!), at Zircon - from 6 to 8-10 M (according to various sources).
              Fourth: X-32 range (note - at the AIR start!) - no more than 1 km, which means that at ground (sea) launch from the surface and at zero initial speed, it should be at least 000 - 1.5 times LESS (i.e. . not more than 2.5-400 km), It seems to fit with Zircon, BUT: If we reduce the X-32 to the mass-dimensional h-k acceptable for UKSK 3P-14, then the range will also dry out - up to 250-300 km! And “Zircon”, according to all reports, has at least 400 (and according to some reports, 600 - 1000 km!) .... Again, “clumsy”
              Well, "for a snack" - appearance:
              X-32:

              "Zircon":

              -----------
              Well, what is in common between them? Okaki "numbed" X-32 can we talk ????
              1. Oleg1263 April 17 2020 14: 37 New
                • 4
                • 2
                +2
                Thank you.
                1. venik April 17 2020 15: 48 New
                  • 5
                  • 2
                  +3
                  Quote: oleg1263
                  Thank you.

                  ======
                  It's my pleasure! drinks
        3. Grigory_45 April 18 2020 00: 48 New
          • 0
          • 2
          -2
          Quote: oleg1263
          It is believed that the "Zircon", it is numbed X-32

          where are the firewood ???

          Based on the available information, the X-32 is a further development of the X-22.
          X-32 is made in the case of X-22. Due to the reduced warhead increased tank volume. Replaced electronics.
          The length of the rocket is 11,65 meters
          Diameter - 0,92 meters
          Height with folded keel - 1,8 meters
          wing span - 3 meters
          Weight - 5,8 tons
          X-22 is not hypersonic (max speed of about 4000 km / h)
          The missile does not fit into the UKKS
      2. Doccor18 April 17 2020 11: 10 New
        • 2
        • 2
        0
        That is - this is not 22350M?
        But there will be 24 kr ... And why
        first 16, if 24 can be put?
        1. Sky strike fighter April 17 2020 11: 14 New
          • 3
          • 1
          +2
          Quote: Doccor18
          That is - this is not 22350M?
          But there will be 24 kr ... And why
          first 16, if 24 can be put?

          Probably thought to build more than 22350, but it was smooth on paper. Yes, and the time was a bit different, more peaceful. Now the deadlines are running out and it is clear that many frigates cannot be built.
          1. Doccor18 April 17 2020 11: 22 New
            • 5
            • 2
            +3
            Again they will write me down as pessimists, but how many originally wanted to build: 48, 36, 24? Looks like no. 6-8 soon. So in any case, on such a modest number of ships, try to shove it to the maximum. Saving here can come sideways.
            1. alexmach April 17 2020 12: 33 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              Looks like no. 6-8 soon

              If memory serves me 6 until 2020.
        2. alexmach April 17 2020 12: 32 New
          • 5
          • 0
          +5
          And why
          first 16, if 24 can be put?

          Probably because it’s impossible at first. Your K.O.

          PS: the news is such a news, not new at all. At the fifth and sixth pledged a year ago, they also promised 24 UKKS cells.
          1. alexmach April 17 2020 13: 25 New
            • 1
            • 1
            0
            At the fifth and sixth pledged a year ago, they also promised 24 UKKS cells.

            And about the 22350M it was reported that they would have doubled the ammunition load in the UKKS compared to the usual one ... Optimists for some reason immediately counted this "twice" from 24 and counted as many as 48 missiles and not 32.
            1. venik April 17 2020 20: 36 New
              • 1
              • 2
              -1
              Quote: alexmach
              And about the 22350M it was reported that they would have doubled the ammunition load in the UKKS compared to the usual one ... Optimists for some reason immediately counted this "twice" from 24 and counted as many as 48 missiles and not 32.

              ======
              "....The total displacement of the frigate will be increased to 7000 tons, the ammunition load of the Onyx, Zircon, and Caliber missiles will reach 48 units*. New frigates will be equipped with Poliment-Redut air defense missile systems from 96 cells for rockets. ..... "
              (*) - "Russia plans to build 12 modernized frigates of project 22350M" (https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/6415468); "(https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/6225675);
        3. Dart2027 April 17 2020 13: 35 New
          • 5
          • 0
          +5
          Quote: Doccor18
          And why
          first 16, if 24 can be put?

          In the process of construction and operation, information is gathered and on its basis some design changes can be made. In this case, we are talking about rearrangement of equipment in the compartment.
          1. Doccor18 April 17 2020 13: 42 New
            • 1
            • 1
            0
            This is all logical.
            However, initially there are not enough 16 cells for the ship for the ocean zone and ... it seems ... the backbone of our surface component.
            1. Dart2027 April 17 2020 14: 10 New
              • 4
              • 1
              +3
              Quote: Doccor18
              initially not enough 16 cells

              There are 32 more PU Reduta.
              1. Doccor18 April 17 2020 14: 51 New
                • 0
                • 2
                -2
                We are talking about USC, and not about zrk. With zrk there is a separate song.
                1. Dart2027 April 17 2020 15: 06 New
                  • 4
                  • 0
                  +4
                  Quote: Doccor18
                  With zrk there is a separate song.

                  So the ship is one and the place for installation is limited to its hulls.
                2. Grigory_45 April 18 2020 12: 32 New
                  • 2
                  • 1
                  +1
                  Quote: Doccor18
                  We are talking about USC, and not about ZKR

                  could spy on the Americans and put missiles in the same UKKS. In fact, the anti-aircraft missile doesn’t care where to start - from a separate launcher or from a unified launcher (if only the dimensions were consistent and there was a connection to the control system)
                  It seems they took the right direction (at UVP), but again did it half
                  1. Doccor18 April 18 2020 12: 44 New
                    • 0
                    • 1
                    -1
                    [quote = Grigory_45] [quote = Doccor18] We are talking about USK, and not about Zrk [/ quote]
                    could spy on the Americans and put missiles in the same UKKS. In fact, the anti-aircraft missile doesn’t care where to start - from a separate launcher or from a unified launcher (if only the dimensions were consistent and there was a connection to the control system)
                    It seems to have taken the right direction (at UVP), but again did it in half [/ quote
                    You are right, but ... our PCRs are larger than zur in size, if unified, the total number of cells will decrease.
                    Or go on the path of amers, but then you have to limit yourself to 1,5 ton rockets, and forget about onyx / zircons.
                    1. Grigory_45 April 18 2020 13: 12 New
                      • 1
                      • 2
                      -1
                      Quote: Doccor18
                      but ... our PCRs are larger than zur in size

                      let's say not all.
                      If we are talking about the current UKKS, then a rocket no larger than Onyx is placed in it (the caliber is a little smaller, Zircons should be installed in it, the problem will be only with the X-35). Long-range missiles will also fit in perfectly. If anti-aircraft missiles are small-sized, they can be "packed" in several pieces in one cell (as they do in the world, as we do in the case of the same Redoubt). There was one step left - not to make a separate UVP for the same Redut, but to place the missiles in a single launcher. Which can be equipped with missiles based on the specific task facing the ship (air defense, missile defense, strike along the coast, etc.)
                      1. Doccor18 April 18 2020 13: 19 New
                        • 0
                        • 1
                        -1
                        I agree with you. Redoubt and UKKS can be completely unified, if desired and with proper funding. However, Onyx, and, it seems, Zircon, is more than 500 mm in diameter. Onyx, if I am not mistaken, is 750 mm., And weighs more than 3 tons. Missiles of the Caliber family will be included in diameter, and in length, it seems, too. But they and TTX in a weaker way. But we are used to having our PCRs - PKRishche!
                      2. Grigory_45 April 18 2020 13: 53 New
                        • 1
                        • 2
                        -1
                        Onyx stands up remarkably in UKSK 3S14 (the launcher was designed taking into account the use of missiles), it is not included in torpedo tubes.

                        Quote: Doccor18
                        we are accustomed that our pcr is PKRishche!

                        I had to pay for it with large dimensions and weight. In addition, most of the Soviet-era missiles are discontinued (the same Granites), therefore it makes no sense to focus on them. Nowadays we have only Onyxes, Caliber and X-35 from shipboard anti-ship missiles
          2. alma April 17 2020 15: 09 New
            • 3
            • 0
            +3
            However, initially not enough 16 cells for the ship for the ocean zone

            This is a ship DMZ
            1. alexmach April 17 2020 16: 03 New
              • 4
              • 0
              +4
              Well, “Moscow” is a ship in the ocean zone in general, and something about 16 ammunition shells doesn't bother anyone. Everyone is beating themselves in the chest that the ship is modern.
          3. venik April 17 2020 20: 26 New
            • 4
            • 3
            +1
            Quote: Doccor18
            However, initially not enough 16 cells for the ship for the ocean zone

            =======
            22350 is in no way a ship of the OCEAN zone! According to the displacement, and the main parameters: seaworthiness, autonomy and range - this is a ship 2 (second!) rank - i.e. far sea zones!
            For such ships, 16 cells of the UKKS (considering 32 cells of the airborne air defense system of the Redut air defense missile system) is MORE than enough!
            For reference, the only frigate in the world that has comparable firepower - this is the Spanish "Alvaro de Bazan" - 48 cells UVP air defense missile systems + 8 (2x4) deck launchers RCC "Harpoon".
            All the rest are great inferior!
            1. Doccor18 April 17 2020 21: 50 New
              • 2
              • 1
              +1
              Destroyer - ship of the ocean zone. This is clear. A frigate is a ship in the maritime zone. This is also understandable. Everything would be weighed and in its place, if ... for our fleet they built both. However, we will have to be content only with frigates. And in the marine, and in the FAR marine, and in the ocean zones. Destroyers are not expected.
              And if so, then the frigate should not be a frigate, but a SUPER frigate.
              A comparison with the Spanish Navy is at least incorrect. First, Spain is in NATO, and we are on our own. Secondly, the Russian fleet has a much larger range of tasks than any of the European countries. This means that our ships must have more serious requirements.
              1. alma April 17 2020 22: 19 New
                • 3
                • 0
                +3
                we will have to be content only with frigates. And in the marine, and in the FAR marine, and in the ocean zones. Destroyers are not expected.

                Destroyers are expected. Only they will be called cunningly - frigates of some sort of second / third sub-series. Now they’ll fill their hand in the first buildings, and we’ll enter the rhythm along the engines.
                1. Dart2027 April 17 2020 22: 22 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  Quote: alma
                  Only they will be called cunningly frigates of some kind of second / third sub-series.
                  It would be better to return to the traditional name - the cruiser.
                  3rd rank - corvettes.
                  2nd rank - frigates.
                  1st rank - cruisers
                2. Doccor18 April 17 2020 22: 23 New
                  • 2
                  • 1
                  +1
                  We will see.
                  If it is as you said, then it is simply ridiculous.
              2. venik April 17 2020 22: 31 New
                • 0
                • 2
                -2
                Quote: Doccor18
                Destroyer - ship of the ocean zone. This is clear. A frigate is a ship in the maritime zone. This is also understandable. Everything would be weighed and in its place, if ... for our fleet they built both.

                =======
                Do not quite understand the maxim? request
                ------
                Quote: Doccor18
                However, we will have to be content only with frigates. And in the marine, and in the FAR marine, and in the ocean zones.

                ========
                In fact, who do they interferes? The division into "oceanic", "far sea", "near sea" and "coastal" - weight and very CONDITIONAL! As well as dividing ships into "ranks":
                1st rank - displacement> 5 tons (aircraft carriers, cruisers, destroyers, BOD, UDK and nuclear submarines) - “ocean zone” and “distant sea zone”; The commander of the ship is equated with the commander of the regiment.
                2nd rank - displacement of 1 - 500 tons (frigates, watchmen, BDK, DEPL) - "distant sea zone"; The commander of the ship is equated to the commander of the battalion.
                3rd rank - displacement of 500 - 1 tons (corvettes, MRK, MPK, minesweepers, etc.) - "near sea zone".
                That is, as you can see, the “ranking card” is very arbitrary! So, corvettes 20380, as well as 20385, according to the Russian classification - it is quite possible to refer to frigates! Paradox? No! Just a classification - a piece CONDITIONAL! For example, is the 22350M a “super frigate” or is it a destroyer? By displacement - well, almost "Burke"; In armament - and so much more powerful (144 UVP versus 98 - 117 at Burki ..... So - WHO will he be? Superfrigate ... Destroyer?
                In principle, what is the difference in FIG? Yes, “even call a pot!” .....
                --------
                Quote: Doccor18
                A comparison with the Spanish Navy is at least incorrect.

                =======
                Hello to you! Excuse me, are you "in your own mind"? And then with whom to compare, if not with a potential adversary? WITH Martians? Or with yourself? (fool sorry! surprised surprised!!!).
                1. Doccor18 April 17 2020 22: 39 New
                  • 0
                  • 1
                  -1
                  [Quote] [/ quote]
                  Well .... insults rushed ...
                  The Spaniards themselves once said that the “truncated” Aegis is quite enough for them, since they will use frigates exclusively as part of a squadron in the waters of the Bay of Biscay ...
                  I think that for our frigates they will pose broader tasks.
                  Therefore, I wrote about the incorrectness of comparing the Russian frigate with the Spanish. They have different tasks, and therefore there should be different opportunities.
                  1. venik April 17 2020 23: 23 New
                    • 1
                    • 2
                    -1
                    Quote: Doccor18
                    Well .... insults rushed ...

                    ======
                    Well, firstly, Alexander, if "rude" - I apologize - did not want to offend! hi
                    ---------
                    Quote: Doccor18
                    Therefore, I wrote about the incorrectness of comparing the Russian frigate with the Spanish. They have different tasks, and therefore there should be different opportunities.

                    =======
                    Lord Yes, you, Alexander, unfortunately did not understand WHAT I wrote .... And I wrote about Aggregate (!!!) firepower! Yes! Tasks - DIFFERENT! .... So they are in ALL fleets (and even "inside" one fleet can be DIFFERENT!). And not even in one fleet, but even within the framework of ONE PROJECT! Yes Yes! Look at project 1134 and 1134A - first - missile cruisersecond - BOD!!!
                    Question: HOW do you COMPARE ???? The answer is simple, "like the corner of a house" - according to the TOTAL of characteristics!
                    "de Bazan" frigate, "sharpened" for air defense (in this parameter, it even surpasses such a "wagon" as the "Pot". Not much but superior!). But it’s seriously inferior to “Pot” in percussion, and especially in anti-submarine opportunities !!!
                    But! By Aggregate firepower - they are COMPARABLE! Well, everyone else - "and didn’t lie close"! hi
      3. venik April 17 2020 16: 09 New
        • 4
        • 2
        +2
        Quote: Doccor18
        That is - this is not 22350M?

        ======
        No! 22350M will have much more powerful weapons: BC “Onyx”, “Zircon”, “Caliber” will reach 48 units (6 x 8 UKSK 3S-14), and the air defense missile defense system “Polyment-Redut” will be increased from 32 to 96 cells. Those. in terms of the number of beam cells, it will surpass Burki by almost 1.5 times!
        ---------
        Quote: Doccor18
        And why the first 16, if 24 can be put?

        =======
        Probably, it was necessary to make sure that there would be no "overload" and there would be enough space .... Well, maybe some designs made it a little easier .....
        1. Peter is not the first April 17 2020 22: 20 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          It was written that with an increase in the number of cells from 16 to 24, the displacement of the ship also increased. So it is possible that it was not the draft of the ship and the reduction of internal free volumes that increased, but the dimensions of the hull.
          1. venik April 17 2020 22: 48 New
            • 1
            • 2
            -1
            Quote: Peter is not the first
            It was written that with an increase in the number of cells from 16 to 24, the displacement of the ship also increased.

            =======
            Peter! You read the article inattentively: "...The developers managed to carve out a place on board the frigate to add another one to two sections of eight launchers. At the same time, the frigate's displacement changed insignificantly..... "
            -----------
            Quote: Peter is not the first
            So it is possible that it was not the draft of the ship and the reduction of internal free volumes that increased, but the dimensions of the hull.

            ========
            Hardly! When the "Admiral Chichagov" and "Admiral Amelko" were laid last year, the talk about additional weapons was only considered as "hypothetical" .... And that means marking on the plaza, making elements of the keel and frames, cutting sheets, etc. - everything went practically with a "guarantee" on the initial draft! But redesigning the interior at this stage of construction is quite possible!
            So, I’ll “eat my hat” (with a cap in addition!), If they (“Chichagov” and “Amelko”) - at least a meter will differ from “Pot” and “Kasatonych”! hi soldier
    4. ancient April 17 2020 11: 12 New
      • 10
      • 4
      +6
      Quote: Sky Strike fighter
      Although in my opinion it is more logical to equip Zircons in the first place

      Although in my opinion it’s more logical to get at least one .. "fully operational" Zircon, start mass production, and only then .. "puff out your cheeks (or spread your fingers wassat) and indulge ... "sweet dreams and dreams" repeat
      1. Sky strike fighter April 17 2020 11: 19 New
        • 5
        • 4
        +1
        And what do you think has been successfully tested as a last resort for a ground target in the northern Urals from the side of the frigate Gorshkov? You say so as if Zircon is a myth. For some reason, no one doubts about RCC Neptune. Although it is at the same stage.
        1. ancient April 17 2020 11: 30 New
          • 7
          • 5
          +2
          Quote: Sky Strike fighter
          was tested for the last time on a ground target in the northern Urals from aboard the frigate Gorshkov?

          Between .. "tested" and ... "implementation" ........ the abyss of time wink
          Although for the "Urya-patriots" ... this is normal wassat
          1. Sky strike fighter April 17 2020 11: 40 New
            • 7
            • 3
            +4
            Between .. "tested" and ... "implementation" ........ abyss of time wink

            Your words are relevant for RCC Neptune. You’ll be inundated with video, patriots of the local flood in ecstasy.
            1. ancient April 17 2020 11: 41 New
              • 4
              • 2
              +2
              Quote: Sky Strike fighter
              Youtube is littered with video

              But more specifically? belay
              1. Sky strike fighter April 17 2020 11: 43 New
                • 5
                • 4
                +1
                Video of recent trials of RCC Neptune. Relax.
            2. ancient April 17 2020 16: 53 New
              • 9
              • 1
              +8
              Quote: Sky Strike fighter
              Your words are relevant for RCC Neptune

              Engage in "pulling by the ears" ... just to get out of the situation into which they drove themselves ... by their own ... "slogans".
              And where is X_35? She will be in the “lunch” as 35 years old ... “in the ranks”.
              And why shouldn’t this rocket suddenly have to fly at ..country 404?
              1. Sky strike fighter April 17 2020 17: 15 New
                • 2
                • 2
                0
                Engage in "earhooking"

                This is what you do.
                just to get out of the situation into which they drove themselves ... with their own .. "slogans".

                In more detail, in what situation have we driven ourselves and what are interesting slogans?
                And where is X_35? She will be in the “lunch” as 35 years old ... “in the ranks”.

                Since 2003, the first version of the X-35 is in service, since 2015, the universal X-35U is in service. I spoke about Neptune and was surprised at your bias towards the trials of Zircon, while with similar trials of Neptune you have directly opposite emotions. And where is your objectivity?
                And why shouldn’t this rocket suddenly have to fly at ..country 404?

                And why shouldn’t the Zircon rocket suddenly have to fly near the Russian Federation? I did not say that Neptune should not.
                1. ancient April 17 2020 17: 47 New
                  • 9
                  • 0
                  +9
                  Quote: Sky Strike fighter
                  and marveled at your bias towards the trials of Zircon

                  I have no bias towards Zircon, but there are .. claims to your .. "balabolstvo"!
                  Today, there are in fact slogans, media articles and one photo ... supposedly ...

                  Do you know about the gopher? wassat
                  Quote: Sky Strike fighter
                  while with similar trials of Neptune you have exactly the opposite emotions

                  And what are my emotions about Neptune ???? belay
                  The fact that he flies, and not ... "runs" wassat
                  After all, you yourself write that the first X-35s were in service with us in 2003, but in general:

                  The first version of the preliminary design of the rocket was considered in 1983 and, due to non-compliance with the requirements for the characteristics of the radar seeker, it was sent for revision (source). According to sources, another Resolution on the development of the complex was adopted by the USSR Council of Ministers on April 16, 1984 (source).

                  Tests The first launch from the landfill ground launcher was planned on November 4, 1985, but due to a malfunction in automation (incorrect information was issued about the opening of the TPK covers), the launch did not take place. The first successful launch was carried out (on the second attempt that day) on November 5, 1985 at the training ground of the 31st Test Center of the USSR Ministry of Defense (Feodosia, Crimea). According to the launch program, it was assumed that the rocket would fly 40 km. The missile successfully left the TPK, flew about 50 meters and fell into the sea (source). This launch is considered the first launch in the program of flight design tests of RCC X-35.

                  The first public display of the rocket took place at the Mosaeroshow-1992 exhibition.
                  So why can't it be in the country 404? request
                  What are your slogans? - as in that joke ... "here we’ll run another 3 circles Karl and we ... will catch up with her" wassat
                  1. Sky strike fighter April 17 2020 18: 03 New
                    • 2
                    • 5
                    -3
                    That is, the reports of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation about the defeat of the ground target by Zircon at a distance of more than 500 km from the side of the frigate Gorshkov and the data of the American intelligence about the test of Zircon do not believe you. Do you see the need to show the goods face, despite the fact that this is a secret development? Otherwise, you won’t take anyone’s word. Have I correctly stated your train of thought?
                    By the way, you didn’t mention the gopher in vain. If you do not see the gopher, it does not mean that it is not there. It is the same with Zircon. See everything in due time.
                    So why can't it be in the country 404?

                    I ask again: when did I say that?
                    as in that joke ... "here we’ll run another 3 circles Karl and we ... will catch up with her"

                    What is it and what is it about? Which Karl? Who will catch up with whom? Zircon is a new milestone in the history of the creation of RCC / KR, for the first time and again it’s a hypersound, and even in quite compact reasonable sizes, naturally no one is going to share information. And you show it all, show it.
                    1. ancient April 17 2020 19: 47 New
                      • 8
                      • 1
                      +7
                      Quote: Sky Strike fighter
                      That is, the reports of the Russian Defense Ministry about the defeat of a ground target by Zircon at a distance of more than 500 km from the side of the frigate Gorshkov

                      I personally have nothing but 2bukFF. "
                      Quote: Sky Strike fighter
                      and you don’t believe the US intelligence about the Zircon test.

                      Why do not I believe ... I believe that tests are underway and I believe the Americans ... after all, only you think that a probable adversary can only ... "slurp soup with his foot."
                      Quote: Sky Strike fighter
                      See everything in due time.

                      Now when we see, then we will fellow
                      Quote: Sky Strike fighter
                      So why can't it be in the country 404?

                      I ask again: when did I say that?

                      And this is not your quote ??? -
                      Your words are relevant for RCC Neptune. You’ll be inundated with video, patriots of the local flood in ecstasy.

                      Quote: Sky Strike fighter
                      Zircon is a new milestone in the history of the creation of anti-ship missiles / missiles, for the first time and again it’s a hypersound, and even in quite compact reasonable sizes

                      A hypersonic long-range cruise missile (draft) / hypersonic experimental aircraft (GELA). The development of the X-90 rocket was carried out at the ICB "Rainbow" (Dubna), together with TsAGI in the 1980s to replace the long-range air defense missile system X-55. General Designer - I.S.Seleznev. The development was a continuation of the work on the creation of a hypersonic rocket, begun at the Rainbow Design Bureau in the early 1970s by the creation of the Model1 hypersonic prototypes (tests 1973-1978) and Model 2 (1980-1985). ) Preparations for the production and production of missiles on the subject of the B-239 MKB "Rainbow" began in 1986 at the Tushino Engineering Plant. In addition to several technological and design specimens on the B-239 theme, three flight specimens of missiles were built. We do not have information about successful flight tests of the X-90.

                      On the basis of the X-90 rocket project, in the late 1980s and early 1990s, an experimental hypersonic apparatus, GELA, was created and supposedly tested (source). According to unconfirmed data from the TV programs, the first flight tests of either the X-90 prototype or the GELA took place at Engels airbase in early December 1987. The airborne rocket engine test bench for the GELA, designed for marching speed 4.5M, was successfully completed in October 1988. Project work X-90s were discontinued in 1992. For the first time in public, the GEL apparatus was demonstrated at the MAKS-1995 air show in Ramenskoye.

                      When describing the X-90 / GEL rocket in various media and other sources (including well-deserved ones), confusion with the Meteorite ASB-AS-X-19 KOALA often arises.
                    2. Sky strike fighter April 17 2020 20: 29 New
                      • 1
                      • 4
                      -3
                      Well, how much did the X-90 weigh? 15 tons. It was planned to place 160 X-2s on the Tu-90. The range of 3000-3500 km was good, but the weight was bad. It was largely because of this that the X-90 was not adopted for service. There are few platforms for them. Zircon fits into the standard UKKS sizes at hypersonic speed, which for the first time achieved a balance between the size and performance characteristics of a hypersonic missile.
                    3. Grigory_45 April 18 2020 13: 27 New
                      • 1
                      • 2
                      -1
                      Quote: Sky Strike fighter
                      Zircon, however, fully fits into the standard UKKS sizes at hypersonic speed, which is the first time that a balance has been achieved between the size and performance characteristics of a hypersonic missile

                      Do you know the performance characteristics of the rocket (Zircon)? Where, if, as you say, the development is so secret that you can’t even show a photograph of a rocket? A TTX can be published?
  • KVU-NSVD April 17 2020 10: 55 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    The developers managed to carve out a place on board the frigate to add another one to two sections of eight launchers. In this case, the displacement of the frigate has changed slightly.
    That's interesting - how? Maybe the dimensions were increased, but the layout was redrawn. Or maybe the crew will be smaller, and more automation. In general, of course, the good news ... 24 launchers .. not enough! wink
    1. Overlock April 17 2020 10: 59 New
      • 10
      • 0
      +10
      Quote: KVU-NSVD
      24 launchers .. not enough!

      request and so they "stuck the non-crib". And thanks for that
      1. ancient April 17 2020 11: 14 New
        • 5
        • 4
        +1
        Quote: Overlock
        and so they "stuck the non-crib". And thanks for that

        Promise (which in extreme times is done quite regularly and on all ... "fronts" wink ) does not mean yet ..... "get married" wassat
    2. Sky strike fighter April 17 2020 11: 01 New
      • 2
      • 3
      -1
      For the frigate 22350, its size is normal. But why didn’t you find a place for 24 launchers from the very beginning, if this was originally possible?
      1. jonht April 17 2020 11: 17 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Most likely, the free volumes pledged for modernization were used. And maybe they stung the crew’s area, taking out some of the equipment from the vacated area.
        Although, who can except the developers themselves know exactly. hi
    3. alexmach April 17 2020 12: 40 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      That's interesting - how?

      If you take a look at the photographs you can see that the UKKS are placed perpendicular to the board in the bow. Perhaps lengthened by a meter and a half to 2 of one of the sections?
      1. bayard April 17 2020 13: 30 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Quote: alexmach
        Perhaps lengthened by a meter and a half to 2 of one of the sections?

        Nah, they turned it 90 degrees (to the position “along the side) and fit exactly 3 of the UKKS. This decision came up immediately - it is obvious that the place is walking. Yes, and a BC from 24 KR is much more rational:
        - 8 PLO;
        - 8 anti-ship missiles;
        - 8 KR on the ground.
        As a result, to fulfill the knowledge base there will be an assortment for everything, with possible variations.
        1. alexmach April 17 2020 16: 00 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          No, they turned it 90 degrees (to the position “along the side) and placed exactly 3 UKKS. Such a solution was obvious right away - it’s obvious that the place is walking

          Obviously the place is walking? And the mass also walks? And where is she walking?

          The mass of one UKKS 14 tons. If, for example, load it with Onyxes we get + 24 Tons. Onyxes in the Launch glass + 31 tons, okay, well, let's say we dispensed with glasses, total + 8 UKKS cells are + 38 tons. Is it like this just that you can add 38 tons to the bow of the ship? or still you have to add something else to balance the stern? Yes, and given the fact that the missiles, of which now in three UKKS can be up to 73 tons, can shoot, which will ease the nose ...
          1. bayard April 17 2020 19: 17 New
            • 3
            • 0
            +3
            How exactly the three UKKS will be located was shown a year ago, when the previous two buildings were laid. Surely they also thought about balancing, but unfortunately they did not report the details ... request
            The 22350M seems to add a section with three more UKKS in the same way located, bringing the ammunition up to 48 units. The picture was also given.
            1. Dart2027 April 17 2020 19: 21 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Quote: bayard
              The 22350M seems to add a section with three more UKKS in the same way located, bringing the ammunition up to 48 units.

              No, there the whole ammunition will be increased by both Caliber and Redoubt.
              1. bayard April 17 2020 20: 16 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Quote: Dart2027
                No, there the whole ammunition will be increased by both Caliber and Redoubt.

                Well, that means two sections.
                Just kidding.
                Of course I know about it. Hopefully next year they will already be laid.
                1. Dart2027 April 17 2020 22: 20 New
                  • 1
                  • 0
                  +1
                  Quote: bayard
                  Hopefully next year already laid

                  I hope.
            2. alexmach April 17 2020 20: 24 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              How exactly three UKKS will be placed was shown a year ago

              Unfortunately, I have not seen.
              But in general, as they have already said in other comments, the main question is not how they will be raised, but how quickly they can be built in a series ...
              1. bayard April 17 2020 23: 53 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                Everything will depend on how domestic power plants show themselves on sea trials. If there are no complicated shoals and you don’t have to redo / eliminate anything critical, then the power plant is successful and nothing will hinder serial production.
                And if there is a power plant, then the pace of construction of frigates will be 4 - 5 years - 5 years at the initial stage and about 4 years when the series goes into acceleration. The fact that the construction of the previous series of frigates - the so-called. "indian order". Then generally in 3,5 years fit. And the first three Black Sea frigates were built at the same pace.
                The same will happen with the 22350 and 22350M, when all issues with the power plant will be resolved, now only this slows down normal operation. And the fact that the frigates are laying in pairs for the second year, indicates that everything should be normal with the GEM.
                Another sign of this is the early launch of a frigate from the first domestic power plant. They were supposed to be lowered in the middle of summer, and lowered in the period from late April to early May. So installation installation went smoothly and without any problems. It remains to wait for the descent and sea trials.
                After 5 years, the entire series (8 frigates) will be in operation.
                1. alexmach April 18 2020 09: 47 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  After 5 years, the entire series (8 frigates) will be in operation.

                  Hmm ... just need more of them ... But in general, your forecast is realistic.
                  Here, in my opinion, not only the question of "how to show" but also in the speed of production, including the GEM. The first experimental almost a year was collected at the stand.
                  1. bayard April 18 2020 11: 35 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    Quote: alexmach
                    Hmm ... just need more of them ..

                    If you are about the prospect in 5 years, then if the 22350M bookmarks begin next year at a rate of 2 per year, then there will be another 5 8M destroyers on the stocks, in completion and in tests (22350 years later). But this is if you build on one shipyard, and USC seems going to drive them with two shipyards, apparently they will connect Kaliningrad.
                    Production capacities for power plants were created \ are created at the rate of building a large fleet at a good pace, so there will be enough power plants for shipyards. If only their tests and refinement passed without delays and executions.
                    1. alexmach April 18 2020 17: 14 New
                      • 0
                      • 0
                      0
                      then if bookmarks 22350M begin next year at a rate of 2 per year

                      and USC seems going to drive them by two shipyards, apparently they will connect Kaliningrad

                      Oops .. and here you have become overly optimistic.
                      1. bayard April 18 2020 18: 40 New
                        • 1
                        • 0
                        +1
                        I just listed the statements made, but any loafer can fill up any good deed.
                        I appreciated the opportunities and plans. There were statements from USC that they were ready to lay 4 buildings each year only in the Baltic shipyards ... which, by the way, was done last year. How will it be - let's see.
                        Well, the reasons for our long-term construction should be looked at objectively. There are already (I hope) no reasons for them, but the work will show everything.
                      2. alexmach April 19 2020 10: 44 New
                        • 1
                        • 0
                        +1
                        Hmm .. see what they write in the next article. As per order.
                        Regarding the improved frigate of project 22350M, it is reported that after the completion of the preliminary design in 2019, the military did not make any decision on further work on the project.

                        In general, there is no certainty regarding the 22350M, only a preliminary design is ready, and so far no specifics are on.
                        There were statements from USC that they were ready to lay 4 buildings each year only in the Baltic shipyards ... which, by the way, was done last year. How will it be - let's see.
                      3. bayard April 19 2020 13: 16 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        In the next article (in the comments) I already wrote off my opinion. In addition, it was still about plans to force majeure with a fictitious virus. If the space marines landed from the planet Nibiru tomorrow, they will show it to us on TV and ask them to throw in cartridges, this will also be a new reality and an occasion to abandon some plans.
                        With 22350M problems most likely with power plants on gas turbines M70FRU and M90FR and their gearbox, and laying ships with an unprepared and untested power plant is a crime. Apparently, therefore, it was decided so far to slow down work with the 22350M, and continue to continue the 22350+ series. Therefore, quite recently, the opinion was voiced that a brigade of frigates 22350+ would also be built for the Black Sea Fleet.
                        But even these plans are directly dependent on whether the landing party will land from Nibiru, and whether the evil coronovirus will eat everyone.
                        In the meantime - Christ is Risen, The fire was lit, life goes on! drinks
                      4. alexmach April 19 2020 18: 00 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        In addition, it was still about plans to force majeure with a fictitious virus

                        Yes, what does the virus have to do with it? It is said that they finished the preliminary design in 2019, even before the virus, then the MO thinks. If he thinks it means no plans so far. And all statements like "we could" are nothing to talk about.
                        With 22350M problems are most likely with power plants on gas turbines M70FRU and M90FR and their gearbox

                        Experts say just that the problems with these power plants, and especially with the gearboxes, should be less than with the power plant 22350. To "make friends" two high-speed turbines are easier than a turbine and a diesel engine.
                        and laying ships with an unprepared and untested GEM is a crime

                        Firstly, no crime. The ship and the power plant for it begin to build plus or minus at the same time. Well, experience 22350 showed that Russia is able to bring at least one project to its logical end. And the GEM by 22350M would be brought to readiness.

                        Well, with one comment above, you wrote that almost 2 brigades of them will be laid down in the next 5 years ... This ship will not be ready for bookmarking, let alone mass. Moreover, there is no decision to build them yet.
                        Apparently, therefore, it was decided so far to slow down the work with the 22350M

                        IMHO a strange decision, maybe by the way they are waiting for launching and testing 22350+
                        Therefore, quite recently, the opinion was voiced that a brigade of frigates 22350+ would also be built for the Black Sea Fleet

                        The brigade? Yes, at least a couple would have been built for him, I’m still silent about at least the brigade for the Pacific Fleet and the Northern Fleet. And this is already almost 2 times more than the number of ships laid down and planned for construction at the given moment.
                        But generally correct. 22350 and + should be built as much as possible until other ships of other development options for the surface fleet capable of operating in the DMZ have been mastered and there are none.
                      5. bayard April 19 2020 18: 43 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Quote: alexmach
                        Yes, what does the virus have to do with it?

                        Well, let me restrain my unreasonable fears. lol

                        Quote: alexmach
                        It is said that they finished the outline design in 2019,

                        Yes, at the end of the year. And this year (presumably until the end of it) a full technical project should be completed.
                        But.
                        One of these days (until the middle of May) the first frigate with the domestic power plant should be launched. Sea trials of it can begin before the end of this year, but they need at least another year to complete them.
                        At this time, the GEM for the 22350M is not yet ready. It is of course simpler to implement, you are right, but on it the work of both turbines should be plus on the gearbox at full speed. That is, this GEM must be properly tested first at the stand, and it will take a year or two.
                        Moreover, with such difficulty the obtained GEM for 22350, if the series is not continued, may be limited to a series of only 4 sets ... this is very, VERY irrational. Therefore, it seems that a decision was made to continue the 22350+ series, laying MORE 4 pcs. for the Black Sea Fleet, bringing the entire series to at least 12 copies. The very two years of the lag, before the appearance of a fully tested GEM for the 22350M, can be used for laying them.
                        That is, the capacities of the CVDs will not stand idle, on the contrary, they will be fully utilized. But when the industry is completely ready for the 22350M bookmarks, they will be laid. And the percentage of novelty in new ships relative to 22350 will not exceed 15 - 20%, which is the optimum for industry. After all, the 22350M is the same "Gorshkov", but with a larger VI, with a new power plant and increased ammunition (KR and SAM). Everything else will be the same.
                        And this is good .
                        In addition, enterprises must also be prepared to start production of a new GEM, and this is time, costs and stress for the industry. Therefore, the industry should be protected from stress.
                        Quote: alexmach

                        Well, with one comment above, you wrote that there will be almost 2 brigades of them in the next 5 years ...

                        This is not my statement, but Putin and the head of the USC - 12 frigate-destroyers, with an option for another 6 pcs.
                        Decision is made .
                        But the contracts have not been signed yet, because there is not yet a technical project and the GEM is not ready. Well, the new production will not be pulled by the launch of almost simultaneously the production of TWO new power plants request , let it be gradual - launch turbodiesel couples, fix all their childhood illnesses and launch full and reliable products in a series, and only then launch the next product in a series. So it will be more correct.
                        It seems to me that this is the case.
                        In any case, the ships will be laid down, which we should see very soon - before May 9th. hi
  • sanik2020 April 17 2020 11: 00 New
    • 3
    • 2
    +1
    It will be pleasant when the ships are launched, otherwise there was talk at the top about the revision of cash flows in the defense industry. The owners of factories and shipyards, amid the economic downturn, will begin to tear the budget cake and pull the blanket over themselves and, as usual, accuse each other of disrupting the defense order. Examples are already available.
    1. Sky strike fighter April 17 2020 11: 07 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      But what’s the point? This will only aggravate the situation, because then factories will rise and unemployment will increase. During the crisis, it is necessary to start new jobs in order to revive the economy and overcome the crisis, and not vice versa. These are elementary things. What is not clear? If everything is stopped, then it is simply impossible to get out of the crisis. Post-Soviet Eastern Europe, as an example, where everything stopped after the Union and everything in industry is not very successful.
  • Valery Valery April 17 2020 11: 03 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    The power of the Navy is growing !!
  • g1v2 April 17 2020 11: 17 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    According to the good frigates 22350 and 22350m, 15 pieces and 30 pieces are needed now, after 15-20 years, all fleets will be retired, as 956 Sarychei, BPC 1155, old Black Sea men and Baltic 11540 are dropped out. and in general, the GEM needs to be addressed first. The project is excellent, if you expand the bottlenecks and build it continuously in large batches, you can reduce the cost and seriously accelerate the construction. It would be nice, after solving issues with the geo-electric power plant, to master the project also at Yantar. TO BUILD IMMEDIATELY ON TWO SHIPYARDS.
  • Eskobar April 17 2020 12: 19 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    "It is assumed that the frigates included in this series will become a serious deterrent and strengthen the defense capability of the Russian Federation." To do this, they must at least be! And then for the required period of 8 ships passed 1! And God forbid this year they’ll give the fleet
  • Old26 April 17 2020 14: 00 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Quote: oleg1263
    A bit strange reaction. Motivate, if not difficult.

    Sorry, Oleg, and how to motivate? Excuse me, excuse me, your stupidity about the fact that the “Zircon” is a numbed X-32? You can find out how it is possible to put rockets with a length of 12 meters and dimensions (the circumscribed circle around folded planes - about 1,3-1,5 meters) into a universal launcher 8-8,5 meters long and less than 0,9 meters in diameter? To hammer her there with a sledgehammer?
  • Old26 April 17 2020 21: 33 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Quote: Sky Strike fighter
    Well, how many X-90 weighed

    And there was no such rocket. Its name is the invention of our media. What is now called the "non-our" word "fake".
  • Nemchinov Vl April 18 2020 15: 27 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    The seventh and eighth frigates of project 22350 will now be able to arm 24 assault missiles of various types.
    years ago, news about the laying of frigates sounded the same ....
  • Evil 55 April 18 2020 15: 29 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    24 ... four times smaller than Arly Burke and almost five times smaller than Type 55 ... What to be proud of?